Great video! I only picked out the OG once (first sample) but I could always pick out the Fantom - that's killed my GAS for a Juno X! I have the Cloud ones though, and do love them.
Great comparison. For me personally, the differences are so minor to my ears as to be virtually indistinguishable. Makes me feel okay about resubscribing to Roland Cloud again.
@@ScottsSynthStuff I was (still am) a bit cynical of the Roland Cloud, but it is great being able to set a sound up on the System-8 and then take seconds to clone it to a virtual System-8 in my DAW, reverb, arpeggio and all the sliders/pots and (most important) sound all exact, then do the same with a virtual Juno 106 etc. , all of a sudden you’ve made your System-8 a multitimbral , multi engined hybrid beast that kicks the poop out of normal vst’s because it’s got full physical control alongside (theoretically) unlimited virtual replication. I bought the System-8 at the same time as a Hydrasynth thinking the system-8 was possibly a mistake and wouldn’t get a look in, but it’s been the opposite and the S-8 / Roland Cloud workflow has been a definite part of that (alongside the native S-8 engine being so good , as you’ve noted)
I love this video!!! I was able to pick out the real Juno on the 1st example right off the bat, because for me there is no mistaking the beautiful and slightly out of pitch sounds from the real Juno, it's so lovely. It was a bit harder on the resonance patch. I wasn't able to pick that one out. I did successfully pick out the Juno the the Bass patch as well though. As a 80s kid, growing up then and in the 90s, (and anyone older), there must be something embedded in our ears that just knows that classic sound when it's played! I tell you what though, those plugin vsts are darn good at recreating the sound! Out of the 3 digital synths, I'm thinking the Fantom sounds best, followed by the System 8, followed by the vst in last place, but they all sound great! Awesome vid!
Thanks for doing this comparison, Scott. Following on from your 106 upgrade series and as an owner of a System-8, this is something I'm really interested in. I think I could pick out some differences, but I couldn't identify the right synth (aside from guessing).
So many people do these comparisons all wrong I knew yours would be good. Most people don’t realize how much the CZcams compression affects audio. For me the only thing I can tell listening on iPhone 14 AirPod pro gen 1 is the real Juno sounded very different , but it was the sustain and fade out that sounded analog. All the tones sounded clear like I could hear each source slowly losing voltage. The system 8 sounded the most different at that spot (the fade out of the initial 4 bar diddy) I actually heard some phasing like when there is minor tuning issues between the tones, where the Juno was clear. That’s just what I heard first time through .
You make the BEST videos ever!! My first ever polyphonic synth was the Juno-106 (and like an idiot I sold it) but I have a System 8 now and it's just fine for me.... I often wonder if the subtle differences really even matter?? I mean unless you're recording with Donald Fagen I think we're all safe to use the real thing or emulations.. LOL! Just a thought.....
I watched your video on a TV in my spare room listening through a cheap soundbar. I immediately managed to pick out the Roland Cloud, only because the Roland plugins tend to sound really bright. The plugin did sound good on my crappy speaker though. I did find the others a bit more difficult to differentiate though. Whether you're using original analog gear or a modelled version, they're going to be pretty much indistinguishable in a mix I suppose. I find that it's a nice privelege owning some original vintage gear, but as technology improves the main difference between these old classics is becoming more and more just a psychological one.
Nice video, the only one I could tell apart with certainty on my KRKs was the Fantom. I would have liked to have heard the Roland JU-06 in the comparison too as I own one, but thanks for sharing.
Great video. Makes me love my Deepmind 12 all the more, and Behringer did the Juno 106 proud honoring it. I couldn't pick the Juno out of any of them, however, the Fantom was easily discerned for the reasons you stated. I'm using JBL Pro studio monitors.
🙏💚🧡👌have the Dm12D. We were listening a mp4 video and actually my headphones are in repair,, was listening as cooking to the cats and the Dog, so I kept only the first Ju106, the plugging is a little too clean for an old instrument. I have a Juno 6, and the Dm12 is complementary, because of it's proper abilities. But the Juno chorus is unique.
@@patriciaoudart1508the Juno chorus is actually quite easy to replicate nearly identical on the deepmind when you adjust the chorus setting just right.
My old singer gave me his before he passed. I have the Original Juno 106. I don't use it I guess it's just for collecting for now! I got a newer Yamaha Keyboard as well as a Yamaha Digital Grand so I can use the Softube version that they have of the Juno. Its been fun hearing some old school tones.
I owned a Juno 106. It's sitting in my friends loft. Sadly in need of repair. Even after all these years without having it, I knew from having a trained ear (even with tinnitus lol) that the second sample was the real deal in the first example. I'm pretty impressed with myself that I was able to pick out! EDIT: I got the second challenge correct too. The third challenge I got it wrong but not too bad considering.
As an ex Roland Senior engineer and authorised service centre for almost 35 years, my advice is to sell your vintage gear now whilst you can still get decent money for it! I did guess the real 106 right due to its warmth on the low end but that difference was negligible as it is with many synths and good VSTs nowadays. The Chinese are cloning everything and doing a convincing job at a fraction of the price with the likes of Behringer. This is also why I cannot get schematics on line for the equipment I'm repairing, because it's easy to clone gear from a manufacturers schematic.
@@hjhkjhre454554Of course for collectors, it's always nice to have the original equipment, but for those who just want that specific sound; I still say sell at a good price whilst you can!
First time watcher, enjoyed vid; 1/3 right on the quiz; today i've come by a few synths, just looking a crash course on how get the best out of them from setting one up physically and what they can do, to how to care for one. Best Wishes
Awesome comparison. The OG 106 really shined in the bass test. The Fantom was always obvious to me, but sometimes I could only differentiate between the ACB and the OG 106 was that there were 2 instances that sounded the same, so the odd one out was 106. But geez that bass of the 106 was a wow moment.
First of all, thanks for this great video and explaining and letting hear the differences between these models. You really explained very good the difference between the zen-core model expansion and the vst. I was looking for that and couldn’t find it. I am also curious what the comparison of these models would have been with the zenology software version with the model extension in a DAW, would it sound the same as the fantom or would it be the same story like the vst vs the system-8 missing the analog output? As explained I understand it would be a pain in the ass to set that one up also. But maybe there could be a comparison for that in the future? Keep up the good work💪🏻 it’s really inspiring 😊
I use an X32 as a super interface too - super flexible. Mine goes ADAT from the expansion card to an RME RayDAT, but I imagine the USB or Dante paths are similar.
Thanks for this. Great comparison. I don't know if this will ever be done, but I'd love to see a comparison with a bunch of VSTs and TWO original synths. Every old analog sounds a little different, so ti would make it a lot harder for people to simply choose the wonkiest one as the "real" synth. You could make it even harder by dialing up the "vintage" settings on the VSTs so they drift and act up.
Very true. What is the "true" sound of a specific analog synth? No such thing, as by their nature, every one of them is going to sound a little bit different than every other one. I thought about dialing up "vintage" or "condition" settings on the various synths (the Fantom and System-8 have them too), but being that my Juno-106 is just freshly calibrated, I figured that would be disingenuous.
@@ScottsSynthStuff Freshly calibrated maybe, but still aged components - and definitely distinguishable in this test … Round 2, with ‘vintage’/‘Condition’ settings doen to match your 106 as best as possible, would be interesting! Hope you saved those patches!!!! 😉 Thanks for all your work on this. I’d like a System 8, but I have to wonder how far off an ACB successor is, now … … … 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
Liked your video. Sounds are very similar, I'll take the original 106 for the 106 sound. They all have different features like controllers, effects, etc. Juno 106 has its own simplicity, no velocity or aftertouch and just plays well. Glad you can get the sound from different sources. I am looking for the 106 sound when I am away for a few months every year and your video convinced me to go with the Roland cloud purchase as I do not have the room on my island ohana for a lot of gear. Thank you
Thank you for confirming that.....the Roland Juno 106 models really do sound like the Juno 106 keyboard. Do you really think that many people are going to care about these extremely minimal differences? While I agree the original sounded less bright, it was barely different and nothing to get too excited about in the difference. And I'd think pretty easy to adjust your modeled Juno 106 patch to sound less bright if desired. If you compared two original analog Juno 106 keyboards, you'd probably find a minimal difference between them. But like these differences, nothing to get too concerned about. And for us live performers who aren't making recordings, good luck trying to identify this differences in the mix of a live band which is exactly who I'd be using it. I went through this comparison myself with my 1973 analog ARP synthesizer and a VST modeled version of it. While like in your video, I could confirm a few minimal differences, not enough of a difference to justify keeping a valuable antique if all I cared about was the sound, going through the hassle to transport it to gigs or to practice and to keep up with the expensive and frequent maintenance issues. So I sold my beloved ARP. But.....I feel like it's never left! By the way, Roland offers both the System 8 ACB version of the Juno 106 as a software VST and they also offer their ZenCore model used in their Jupiter X, Phantom & Juno-X as a software VST also. You get your choice or can have both. The ACB version offers the most realistic model both in sound & interface, but uses more computer resources and has less polyphony (typically similar to that of the original instrument) and the ZenCore version offers a lot more polyphony and operates differently, but more uniform if you use other ZenCore instruments if you know how to do something on one, it likely works the same way on a different ZenCore model. In my opinion "for most people", it is not worth the expense, taking up the space in your home or studio, or hassle/risk of transporting antiques to gigs or practice or the cost/hassle of repairing the original keyboard vs the modeled versions. Remember that the software models are "a reproduction". And with reproductions of any types, some very small differences usually occur, often barely detected by most people. It's up to each of us to decide how important these differences really are to us. I'll also note, I never found the Juno 106 to be that exciting to begin with. If I was going to still own real analog classics, it would be something more like an OB-X, ARP 2600, Prophet 5, Mini Moog, etc. But I'm very satisfied with my software models. One laptop covers them all in my bands. I dream I had since 1985 when I discovered soft synths on the Amiga computer.
You're right, the vast majority of people are not going to hear a difference, particularly in a mix. You're also correct about two Juno-106's not sounding the same. They are analog synths, which means their sound changes as they age, through use, environmental factors such as temperature and humidity, and more. I calibrated my Juno-106 only a month ago, and already I can hear differences in the filters between different voices in it. The joy of owning analog synths!
@@ScottsSynthStuff That's why I ditched mine in favor of very good VST clones. If they didn't capture the character of the sound, I wouldn't use them. But they do an excellent job of the essence and important elements of capturing the sound for a number of classic synths. I only wish the MIDI controller market would make more suitable keyboards for using them in a way that would appeal to people that used the originals, instead of a focus on the low end market.
@ghost mall "and just the satisfaction that you’re playing a piece of history" I think that sums it up for 99% of the people that insist on old school synths a lot more than "because of the sound difference". Without a doubt playing with the originals IS more fun. But if your just looking to recreate these sounds, a VST or modern clone will get you the sound with in minuscule differences between them. Not enough of a difference for most to be concerned about, or even notice most of the time. I found with my favorite patch on my ARP, a small difference between them....but.....not enough of a differences to really care! And most of the sounds was completely spot on. When I get a multi-million dollar recording contact......then I'll care... Otherwise, I really don't.
I'm actually impressed with how close the VST System-8 is to the real life System-8, I'll need to invest my time more into learning it! You're right about not being able to identify it in a live situation or a mixdown. But it definitely stuck out when compared in this way, didn't sound too good.
Loved the video. I had a Juno 6 when it first came out, but between it not being a Jupiter , and then MIDI, patch memory and multitimbral coming along it just sat not getting any love and I never really rated it. Just picked up a System 8 and I’m really enjoying having those Juno sounds again but with patches and MIDI. You’re right, the Fantom just sounds smudged, but 1st time through I was picking the the System 8 and Cloud version as my 1 & 2 choice for the original with the actual 106 in 3rd place as my guess for the cloud, the fantom came 4th every time, and makes me glad I didn’t go for a Jupiter X instead of the system 8
I was really thinking about moving to a Jupiter X from the System-8, but I agree, that's not going to be an option for me now. I'm underwhelmed with the ABM Zen-Core models, both from a user interface/sound design aspect, as well as the end result.
Hi Scott, as always, a very interesting job. Thank you. I'm not sure to get good ears enough to recognize one from the 4. Yet, one seems to be apart : the Fantom. I can hear some real differences. I've red some comments from different people saying that the Zen Core system produces a less good emulation than the other one. (I'm not sure but I think that the System 8 can export digital audio with USB output). Another thing too : it would have been great if you could have the Behringer Deepmind 12, because it is supposed to be a re-creation og the Juno 106. Plus, we can get the original Juno factory sounds in it ! It wouild have been easy to compare the both. Thank again and please : go on this kind of video.
You're correct that the System-8 can send digital audio, although it requires that it be an ASIO interface, and on Windows, you only get one ASIO interface allowed - so if you're already using an ASIO interface for your audio interface, you can't use a second one from a synth. That's the trouble with all these synths that offer this type of functionality. I've thought about having a DM before, but have not bought one for exactly the reason you state - it duplicates a lot of what I already have.
@@ScottsSynthStuff Thanks for these precise informations about the System 8. About the DM, there are some big differences with Juno, though : The DM has a powerful and versatile effects unit (up to 4 effects from 35 algorythms), a powerful modulation matrix (8 entries), a Control Sequencer, etc... So the DM can do what the Juno does but many more things too ! I'm not a DM seller !! But among other big units I'm playing (as Kronos, Montage, etc...) this "little" DM 12 is really great and really worth it, in my opinion. But perhaps you wouldn't appreciate it, I don't know !
@@liviou2004 I agree, the Deepmind has an excellent collection of digital effects. I saw Dan Burton (from Behringer) playing a DM12 live when he was touring with Howard Jones and Midge Ure last year.
👍🙏💚🧡thanks, always hard to compare Roland's generations. Note Kebu prefer work directly on his real synths, not to recorded analogs, as he have a Juno 60, and a SH2000, and a bunch of other new Rolands. Sounds are not the same conception. I have a Juno 6 (of course the HPF slider is to change or to repair, I did not notice it's a multi steps. I have a Roland SH 2000 too, one of the first Roland, a Jupiter 50, and a Behringer Deepmind 12 D, a very good instrument if you take off the effects first, but have it's particularity. So I would say the Juno 6 is an analogic reference and others are in the same family, very complementary. Anyway, with any preset, life is an everyday new adventure and being never bored on the SH 2000, i use a composer and some effects, it's a old instrument that I will have to open, but working well. The Juno need the HPF to be revised, and some little thing like missing slider caps, and the vertical top of the wheel broken. I will change nothin if everything works, I will have a look to the power supply, but, I'm anyway to replace it to be powered by solar low current, will see. My project is to be mobile and integrate everything in racks mobile by ten minutes. I'm now to set the different ideas in three racks, with everything in them, the cover being euroracks, and modular, and trying to take off maximum metal and cables. Not easy but I never do things simply.😱 So in same occasion, thanks for the repair videos 🙋 love when you taken the voltage current, I'm abounded too for those sort of mistake. One of my rack is to mount together a Yamaha Dx7 , Tx7, a key bed CME uf70, and a computer for sysex, and two additional Behringer midi key bed controlers, perhaps a Dx 21 keyboard + expander separately making a FM synthesis programmable ensemble. The idea is to use the best of the sound Yamaha had contribute to in this multivoices system. In the same idea, I don't want to modifie the Juno 6, only make it sound like originally. I have for year the complete technical schemes to do that, will see. The SH2000 will perhaps have some additional things, but originally having portamento, growl effect and randon, and fixed presets, so I hope finding variable resistors, to renew some presets☺️
for system8 acb compare : As hardware as its own d/a which is reconverted to a/d by my interface for daw (steinberg ur824) this double conversion alter the signal. I personnaly, in the case of hardware and vst identicals ,and for permit switch software/hardware with no difference of sound, I take grand time to choose the audio cable (jack). they can really change the sounding and i choose the cables that give the same harmonic/frequency range, dybamism... it take time but until now, i've always founded the good matching...
Great video. Personally, I think the Fantom models are just gimmicks. All they seem to do is limit the Zencore engine in the ways the originals are. I don’t even use them anymore as you can get close enough to the sounds of the originals with just the Zencore engine. ACB sounded more analog to me. I never had a 106… but I did a comparison with the DM12, S8, Jupiter Xm and Fantom for my own personal curiosity. The S8 sounded the best when using the choruses, but the DM12 was just as good otherwise. If only had the money for one instrument to give my studio a Roland vibe… it would be the DM12, probably. 🤷🏻♂️🤣
I 100% agree, the "model expansions" seem to be to be little more than templates laid on top of Zen Core to try to make the various filters, oscillators etc. sound like the original synth. The ACB models are so clearly superior. The DM12 is an underrated powerhouse of a synth.
Firstly, I havent use any of them in my live. My initial thought was the best is number 2, then number 4, then 3 and 1. The system 8 very close to the original... (note: For the first test)
The Juno-X uses Analog Behaviour Modelling (ABM), which Attack Magazine writes: "they use a virtual analog synthesis system that the company calls Analog Behavior Modeling (ABM). This is less exact than Analog Circuit Behavior (ACB), which powers the Roland Cloud plugins, but less exact also means less CPU taxing so Roland is able to get much more polyphony out of it (up to 256 notes)." So I guess the Juno-X will sound closer to the Fantom than the real Juno (or the ACB models). It's a shame, I wish Roland would make the Juno-X in the same spirit as Sequential's Prophet 5 rev 4; with true, actually analog hardware.
Right...I explained ABM and ACB in the video. The Juno-X should sound identical to the Fantom, as it is the exact same engine. Same goes for the Jupiter-X and every other Zen-Core based synth. They're all the exact same engine, with different hardware user interfaces.
As an original 106 owner going back to 1985 I was able to pick it out of the first two examples. The third one I missed. I think the original just sounds a BIT dirtier. And the chorus seemed like a factor. Cool video and I think the emulations are incredibly close. So much so that it probably wouldn’t matter in a mix.
Listened only on phone speakers and there I could only figure out which one is the Fantom, which is no surprise as I compared Softube ( which I liked the most), Roland Cloud and Zenology Pro (ZenCore engine) and the latter one just did not cut it.
Not even on headphones, I was right on #1 and #3, but was 50% on #2 (I couldn’t decide between 2 which was the real 106). The real 106 sounds a little warmer and not so “crisp.”
For the most part I feel you really have to know the original synth very well for it to matter. I picked the sounds of the 106 on 2 of the 3 parts by just listenning what sounded most soft and I have never had or played a 106. But as you say, even the different iterations of opamp's used in many of those 80's Roland Synths and the later iterations of MKS models sound slightly different just because many of those MKS models used newer and more stable opamps than the original synth models. A nice test. I'm pretty sure, even the Fantom is a bit off, many fans of Roland gear is gonna be happy with it for live use, and the listeners is not gonna be able to tell the difference anyway. I think we are moving into beeing almost freakish about these things and even a used 106 is nearing redicolous prices today just of the hype. And how many musicians is willing to drag a crap load of retro gear around even you can afford to buy it and keep it in pristine condition just for that last realism. Yeah I can tell a real Hammond B/C/A model any day even clones is darn good today, But god damn it, I have tried hauling a B3 around and nothing is worth what that does to your back suree 🥵
I got the cloud and juno right 2 out of 2 times that I participated. Never really heard the phantom so couldn't say for sure. The VST is always a bit more bright and somewhat thinner sounding or perhaps more Eq'ed and mix ready? Good stuff!
Until I'm able to have another option, starting with a more powerful computer, I'll start with the Zenology models. Close enough is fine for me plus I get a XV5080 emulation which I can use as a former JV1080 user
I am listening through dac/amp and speakers...and original Juno has the warmest sound to me. Other ones are quite similar. I have 106 in my Fantom 8 so can recognize that one also. Mixed up cloud and System 8
I could hear the difference between the two in my studio with the original track, but now that CZcams has had its way with processing my video, I can no longer hear it.
@@ScottsSynthStuff I don’t have System 8 so i can not give a try. But i set my eyes on Juno X ...actually i have ordered one but it's stuck at dhl warehouse because i am at work during delivery time and during opening time. So frustrating sometimes.
@@ScottsSynthStuff Perhaps. I've played the originals, and was no more impressed than with the VST. If CZcams processed it, how do you think it would sound in the mix of a live band through a PA system? I'd think not one person in the audience that would be able to pickup on the differences, or care because it's barely noticeable. Not like a big tonal difference, like say, the difference between a Juno 106 and an Oberheim OB-X for example. Try making those thick lead sounds on a Juno 106. Not gonna happen. But with a VST, we could capture the character of that thick sound even if the fidelity differences could vary. And still, unlikely anyone in the audience would pick up on it.
Thanks, in 1 and 3 i missed in 2 i had all right.These days i ask myself more which ones do i like the most as a Juno106. Gave all examples points and the Juno and Fantom i liked the most the vst and System 8 not so much it seems.Had a Juno 106 and Juno60 in the 90s, was more into the Juno60
Nice video but you forgetting one little feature on the system 8 called "Tone" in the VCA section This feature alone makes the system 8 sounding warmer and darker or the opposite. A genius idea for a virtual synth and also the parameter "Condition" in the menu... Ive owned Juno-106 since 1988 and I sold 2 of them and now with the system 8 and the 2 boutique Ju6(a) in chain mode you're getting 8 voice Juno. I never compared the Cloud to the System 8 but how can you exchange patches exectly? Is it saved in the same format?
Hi Scott - I saw the link for the extra tier on the Z-Stand, however it looks like you have some extra stabilization compared to the one on your link? For reference, I'm trying to put a DX7 on bottom, Juno 106 in the middle, and a Pro One on top. Thanks!
Yes - with three synths on it, it was a little bit...tippy for my liking. I replaced the two horizontal feet with ones that were about 1.5 feet longer (sticking out the back) and also made a little third leg that helped support the back, in the middle. It made it much more stable.
I am on the Roland cloud and have a choice to pick a lifetime key for the Roland 106 vs 60. Actually two keys but one I have chosen the system 8. If you were going to make that choice what would you pick the 106 or 60 on the cloud and a real instrument.
I would really like to know why the 'CONDITION' parameter has a central zero and negative and positive values. What do the negative values mean? I believe the positive ones are for simulating aging of the circuits, and zero should be for no change, that is, without any effect. But what about the negatives? No one explains that. What do negative values of CONDITION mean?
Not really. The noise floor is only when the chorus is engaged, and all the Roland emulations of the 106 actually include that noise when you enable the chorus - although you can switch off that noise aspect of the emulation if you want.
I didn't do so well... 😅 The VST I could spot in the first two, but not on the third. The Fantom I got on the second and third, after hearing how it sounds on the first. That were them all. I blame my old ears. 😉
i could pick the original even through my cellphone speaker. surprised tho that the system 8 was also pleasing. the cloud version is easily distinguished as thin sounding. for me, it was about the depth of the sound character
Thank you Scott, for the comparison of all 4 models! Have you tried using a sustain pedal with the Cloud version? I just can't make it work properly... 😕 on any PC I've tried!?
The System 8 is awesome, it has the warmth of the analog Juno...on the plugin side, I think the Softube Model 84 is the closest, if not dead on emulation I have used.
Thank you Scott. Awsome stuff here, and the effort is amazing. I was very surprised by the Juno 106 expansion in the Fantom. I was disappointed by the System-8 though. I could have sworn that synth sounded so much better when I heard other videos of it, but yeah, the Juno 106 is very crisp and clear, and the Fantom 6 is average overall. The Fantom 06 does best with strings, bells and bass sounds in my opinion. The synths and the choir/instruments are lacking a little bit of something, but their not too bad. If I could go back, I think I would have returned the Fantom 06 though. Overall, the sounds are just not to my liking. There is probably 1 out of every 20 some sounds that I actually like or will use. It's a very weird and strange synth, especially with the way they make you save the patterns/scenes. I do not like it at all. I just wish they would have stuck with just patterns to save the overall instrumental like the Roland JD-XI, which is an amazing piece of gear. It's my favorite synth ever. The JD-XI is something else for the little it has, but the drum kits sound amazing and can't be beat. I don't know what's up with the drum kits on the Fantom 06, but they are just not the same. I really wish that they would have just put the JD-XI drum kits into the Fantom 06, and it would have been so much better. Thanks again. I love your videos.
I really like when you compare sound on different synth. But for what is emulation or copy of same kind of sound usefull ? Since i use synth in 80th i didn't use raw sound of any synth. I allways used a minimum of reverb or other dsp to fit to smoother sound i like. A sound who fit to what i like is way more usefull . Sound should only be inpiration. Why should i cook same bad burger at home like big brands , when i can do much better with imagination ? All music we are listening have effect, we only know wich synth is used because it was writen on the cover of our vinyl.
Great comparisons. The real 106 was fairly easy for me to pick out -- perhaps because I owned one for 6 years and still have recordings from the 80s. The System 8 is almost as easy to ID -- because it sounds like it's trying too hard to be analog. I wasn't able to distinguish the Fantom from the Cloud version. Any of these would work in a mix for most people. It's likely just us synth needs that notice the differences.
The JU-06 actually has the exact same ACB engine as the Juno-106 plugout in the System-8, so apart from the System-8 having more voices, they should sound the same.
@@ScottsSynthStuff , Roland JU-06A have better Fliter / Reso and ENV ADSR quicker more Beef. I have all 3 System in my Studio. Same @ Sh 101 Plug out and System 8. Roland Sh01a Sound better, better Fliter Reso and ENv ADSR are quicker, more Beef.
The Juno 106 sound on the JU-06a comes in the Plug Out acb version that you can purchase and import as a plug out synth, into the Roland System-1 25 key ACB 4 voice synth as it’s 2nd Synth! The System-1 is a really good synth in it’s own right too, for low cost. 😊
If it sounds good I'll use it! It's all about the sound period! Rick Wakeman and Keith Emerson said the same thing or your cheating yourself! Perfection is a false challenge! Do you think you can perfect perfection? When your working that way your a fool in a fools paradise and 5hat leads to extreme anger!
I was prepared for all my guesses to be wrong. I am not an analog snob and I don't assume my ears are magic. I did not use headphones. Test 1. I had no guesses one way or another. I probably should have used headphones, especially for this. Test 2. All I could tell was that the Phantom was the odd man out and most likely an emulation. Test 3. I really suspected 3 was the real Juno. Some degree of subtle wonkiness in the lower mids. Of course, joke's on all of us, you've lied in this video, they were ALL emulations and you'll reveal who's REALLY who in a follow up video. ;)
there is no "warm sound" 😅 I bet, not a single person can tell the difference in a song with a pad, lead or bassline. And what we do with synths? Of course, we made songs. 😉
Maybe you can not...but some people can ( when i wrote ``warm`` what i meant is not as sharp as other ones ...and i wrote that after only first sample )
@@TheBebe666 show me, ther is no one. The songs nowadays are way to much compressed and way too loud. Please, show me a singe human that can identify 5 of 5 songs with analog synths vs digital.
Wow, WTF? I was absolutely sure #1 was the real Juno and #2 which apperently IS the real Juno totally sucks to me. Was absolutely the worst sound of all of them.
I actually bought the System-8 to give me a Jupiter-8 and Juno-106, years before I had the actual Juno-106. The Fantom was for something completely different, and I honestly don't regularly use the model expansions inside of it.
The Juno 106 isn't an expensive synth. I have one and I've never wondered if it really sounds like a Juno 106. I never speculated on how close it was. Indeed, I have a Studiologic Sledge 2.0 and can make it sound like most anything. The difference between a non-106 is always knowing it isn't the real thing, even the boutiques. So just buy a Juno 106. They don't cost that much.
They are all so close!
In a track alongside other sounds, it wouldn't even matter!
Great video! I only picked out the OG once (first sample) but I could always pick out the Fantom - that's killed my GAS for a Juno X! I have the Cloud ones though, and do love them.
On the first challenge I got everyone right. I got the fantom everytime. I own a System 8 myself. I enjoy that synth.
Thanks Scott, I have to say I absolutely love my System 8. I also have a Jupiter X which is nice to play but for tweaking I love the system 8
Great comparison. For me personally, the differences are so minor to my ears as to be virtually indistinguishable. Makes me feel okay about resubscribing to Roland Cloud again.
The Roland Cloud version (and its System-8 version) of that ACB engine is really so close, that the differences are negligible for most people.
@@ScottsSynthStuff I was (still am) a bit cynical of the Roland Cloud, but it is great being able to set a sound up on the System-8 and then take seconds to clone it to a virtual System-8 in my DAW, reverb, arpeggio and all the sliders/pots and (most important) sound all exact, then do the same with a virtual Juno 106 etc. , all of a sudden you’ve made your System-8 a multitimbral , multi engined hybrid beast that kicks the poop out of normal vst’s because it’s got full physical control alongside (theoretically) unlimited virtual replication. I bought the System-8 at the same time as a Hydrasynth thinking the system-8 was possibly a mistake and wouldn’t get a look in, but it’s been the opposite and the S-8 / Roland Cloud workflow has been a definite part of that (alongside the native S-8 engine being so good , as you’ve noted)
I thought the real thing in the first question sounded the most fake 😮
Makes me more ok with saving lots of money on newer gear😊
I love this video!!! I was able to pick out the real Juno on the 1st example right off the bat, because for me there is no mistaking the beautiful and slightly out of pitch sounds from the real Juno, it's so lovely. It was a bit harder on the resonance patch. I wasn't able to pick that one out. I did successfully pick out the Juno the the Bass patch as well though. As a 80s kid, growing up then and in the 90s, (and anyone older), there must be something embedded in our ears that just knows that classic sound when it's played! I tell you what though, those plugin vsts are darn good at recreating the sound! Out of the 3 digital synths, I'm thinking the Fantom sounds best, followed by the System 8, followed by the vst in last place, but they all sound great! Awesome vid!
Thanks for doing this comparison, Scott. Following on from your 106 upgrade series and as an owner of a System-8, this is something I'm really interested in. I think I could pick out some differences, but I couldn't identify the right synth (aside from guessing).
So many people do these comparisons all wrong I knew yours would be good.
Most people don’t realize how much the CZcams compression affects audio.
For me the only thing I can tell listening on iPhone 14 AirPod pro gen 1 is the real Juno sounded very different , but it was the sustain and fade out that sounded analog. All the tones sounded clear like I could hear each source slowly losing voltage.
The system 8 sounded the most different at that spot (the fade out of the initial 4 bar diddy)
I actually heard some phasing like when there is minor tuning issues between the tones, where the Juno was clear.
That’s just what I heard first time through .
You make the BEST videos ever!! My first ever polyphonic synth was the Juno-106 (and like an idiot I sold it) but I have a System 8 now and it's just fine for me.... I often wonder if the subtle differences really even matter?? I mean unless you're recording with Donald Fagen I think we're all safe to use the real thing or emulations.. LOL! Just a thought.....
I watched your video on a TV in my spare room listening through a cheap soundbar. I immediately managed to pick out the Roland Cloud, only because the Roland plugins tend to sound really bright. The plugin did sound good on my crappy speaker though. I did find the others a bit more difficult to differentiate though. Whether you're using original analog gear or a modelled version, they're going to be pretty much indistinguishable in a mix I suppose. I find that it's a nice privelege owning some original vintage gear, but as technology improves the main difference between these old classics is becoming more and more just a psychological one.
Nice video, the only one I could tell apart with certainty on my KRKs was the Fantom. I would have liked to have heard the Roland JU-06 in the comparison too as I own one, but thanks for sharing.
ju-06 uses the same 106 ACB algorithm as the system 8 so they should sound identical
Great video. Makes me love my Deepmind 12 all the more, and Behringer did the Juno 106 proud honoring it. I couldn't pick the Juno out of any of them, however, the Fantom was easily discerned for the reasons you stated. I'm using JBL Pro studio monitors.
Love DM12! ❤ Was surprised how good the Roland Cloud version was. I use Softube’s version though, it sounds more physical to my ears.
🙏💚🧡👌have the Dm12D. We were listening a mp4 video and actually my headphones are in repair,, was listening as cooking to the cats and the Dog, so I kept only the first Ju106, the plugging is a little too clean for an old instrument. I have a Juno 6, and the Dm12 is complementary, because of it's proper abilities. But the Juno chorus is unique.
@@patriciaoudart1508the Juno chorus is actually quite easy to replicate nearly identical on the deepmind when you adjust the chorus setting just right.
My old singer gave me his before he passed. I have the Original Juno 106. I don't use it I guess it's just for collecting for now! I got a newer Yamaha Keyboard as well as a Yamaha Digital Grand so I can use the Softube version that they have of the Juno. Its been fun hearing some old school tones.
I owned a Juno 106. It's sitting in my friends loft. Sadly in need of repair. Even after all these years without having it, I knew from having a trained ear (even with tinnitus lol) that the second sample was the real deal in the first example. I'm pretty impressed with myself that I was able to pick out! EDIT: I got the second challenge correct too. The third challenge I got it wrong but not too bad considering.
As an ex Roland Senior engineer and authorised service centre for almost 35 years, my advice is to sell your vintage gear now whilst you can still get decent money for it! I did guess the real 106 right due to its warmth on the low end but that difference was negligible as it is with many synths and good VSTs nowadays. The Chinese are cloning everything and doing a convincing job at a fraction of the price with the likes of Behringer. This is also why I cannot get schematics on line for the equipment I'm repairing, because it's easy to clone gear from a manufacturers schematic.
Nah
@@hjhkjhre454554Of course for collectors, it's always nice to have the original equipment, but for those who just want that specific sound; I still say sell at a good price whilst you can!
First time watcher, enjoyed vid; 1/3 right on the quiz; today i've come by a few synths, just looking a crash course on how get the best out of them from setting one up physically and what they can do, to how to care for one. Best Wishes
Awesome comparison. The OG 106 really shined in the bass test. The Fantom was always obvious to me, but sometimes I could only differentiate between the ACB and the OG 106 was that there were 2 instances that sounded the same, so the odd one out was 106. But geez that bass of the 106 was a wow moment.
First of all, thanks for this great video and explaining and letting hear the differences between these models.
You really explained very good the difference between the zen-core model expansion and the vst. I was looking for that and couldn’t find it.
I am also curious what the comparison of these models would have been with the zenology software version with the model extension in a DAW, would it sound the same as the fantom or would it be the same story like the vst vs the system-8 missing the analog output? As explained I understand it would be a pain in the ass to set that one up also. But maybe there could be a comparison for that in the future?
Keep up the good work💪🏻 it’s really inspiring 😊
Great video, system 8 seems to be a no brainier if you don’t have ant of the other options!
I agree, the System-8 has been my go-to Roland synth for years now. The native System-8 engine is a powerhouse!
I think it’s great even if you have all the options in the world actually
Great video Scott!
I use an X32 as a super interface too - super flexible. Mine goes ADAT from the expansion card to an RME RayDAT, but I imagine the USB or Dante paths are similar.
Unbelievable. I got them all right 😂😂 But, I don't think the others sound bad, but they are different. One of them the filter was quite different.
Thanks for this. Great comparison. I don't know if this will ever be done, but I'd love to see a comparison with a bunch of VSTs and TWO original synths. Every old analog sounds a little different, so ti would make it a lot harder for people to simply choose the wonkiest one as the "real" synth. You could make it even harder by dialing up the "vintage" settings on the VSTs so they drift and act up.
Very true. What is the "true" sound of a specific analog synth? No such thing, as by their nature, every one of them is going to sound a little bit different than every other one.
I thought about dialing up "vintage" or "condition" settings on the various synths (the Fantom and System-8 have them too), but being that my Juno-106 is just freshly calibrated, I figured that would be disingenuous.
@@ScottsSynthStuff Freshly calibrated maybe, but still aged components - and definitely distinguishable in this test … Round 2, with ‘vintage’/‘Condition’ settings doen to match your 106 as best as possible, would be interesting! Hope you saved those patches!!!! 😉 Thanks for all your work on this. I’d like a System 8, but I have to wonder how far off an ACB successor is, now … … … 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
Liked your video. Sounds are very similar, I'll take the original 106 for the 106 sound. They all have different features like controllers, effects, etc. Juno 106 has its own simplicity, no velocity or aftertouch and just plays well. Glad you can get the sound from different sources. I am looking for the 106 sound when I am away for a few months every year and your video convinced me to go with the Roland cloud purchase as I do not have the room on my island ohana for a lot of gear. Thank you
Thank you for confirming that.....the Roland Juno 106 models really do sound like the Juno 106 keyboard.
Do you really think that many people are going to care about these extremely minimal differences? While I agree the original sounded less bright, it was barely different and nothing to get too excited about in the difference. And I'd think pretty easy to adjust your modeled Juno 106 patch to sound less bright if desired.
If you compared two original analog Juno 106 keyboards, you'd probably find a minimal difference between them. But like these differences, nothing to get too concerned about. And for us live performers who aren't making recordings, good luck trying to identify this differences in the mix of a live band which is exactly who I'd be using it.
I went through this comparison myself with my 1973 analog ARP synthesizer and a VST modeled version of it. While like in your video, I could confirm a few minimal differences, not enough of a difference to justify keeping a valuable antique if all I cared about was the sound, going through the hassle to transport it to gigs or to practice and to keep up with the expensive and frequent maintenance issues. So I sold my beloved ARP. But.....I feel like it's never left!
By the way, Roland offers both the System 8 ACB version of the Juno 106 as a software VST and they also offer their ZenCore model used in their Jupiter X, Phantom & Juno-X as a software VST also. You get your choice or can have both. The ACB version offers the most realistic model both in sound & interface, but uses more computer resources and has less polyphony (typically similar to that of the original instrument) and the ZenCore version offers a lot more polyphony and operates differently, but more uniform if you use other ZenCore instruments if you know how to do something on one, it likely works the same way on a different ZenCore model.
In my opinion "for most people", it is not worth the expense, taking up the space in your home or studio, or hassle/risk of transporting antiques to gigs or practice or the cost/hassle of repairing the original keyboard vs the modeled versions. Remember that the software models are "a reproduction". And with reproductions of any types, some very small differences usually occur, often barely detected by most people. It's up to each of us to decide how important these differences really are to us.
I'll also note, I never found the Juno 106 to be that exciting to begin with. If I was going to still own real analog classics, it would be something more like an OB-X, ARP 2600, Prophet 5, Mini Moog, etc. But I'm very satisfied with my software models. One laptop covers them all in my bands. I dream I had since 1985 when I discovered soft synths on the Amiga computer.
You're right, the vast majority of people are not going to hear a difference, particularly in a mix.
You're also correct about two Juno-106's not sounding the same. They are analog synths, which means their sound changes as they age, through use, environmental factors such as temperature and humidity, and more. I calibrated my Juno-106 only a month ago, and already I can hear differences in the filters between different voices in it. The joy of owning analog synths!
@@ScottsSynthStuff That's why I ditched mine in favor of very good VST clones. If they didn't capture the character of the sound, I wouldn't use them. But they do an excellent job of the essence and important elements of capturing the sound for a number of classic synths. I only wish the MIDI controller market would make more suitable keyboards for using them in a way that would appeal to people that used the originals, instead of a focus on the low end market.
@ghost mall "and just the satisfaction that you’re playing a piece of history"
I think that sums it up for 99% of the people that insist on old school synths a lot more than "because of the sound difference".
Without a doubt playing with the originals IS more fun. But if your just looking to recreate these sounds, a VST or modern clone will get you the sound with in minuscule differences between them. Not enough of a difference for most to be concerned about, or even notice most of the time.
I found with my favorite patch on my ARP, a small difference between them....but.....not enough of a differences to really care! And most of the sounds was completely spot on. When I get a multi-million dollar recording contact......then I'll care... Otherwise, I really don't.
I'm actually impressed with how close the VST System-8 is to the real life System-8, I'll need to invest my time more into learning it!
You're right about not being able to identify it in a live situation or a mixdown. But it definitely stuck out when compared in this way, didn't sound too good.
Loved the video. I had a Juno 6 when it first came out, but between it not being a Jupiter , and then MIDI, patch memory and multitimbral coming along it just sat not getting any love and I never really rated it. Just picked up a System 8 and I’m really enjoying having those Juno sounds again but with patches and MIDI. You’re right, the Fantom just sounds smudged, but 1st time through I was picking the the System 8 and Cloud version as my 1 & 2 choice for the original with the actual 106 in 3rd place as my guess for the cloud, the fantom came 4th every time, and makes me glad I didn’t go for a Jupiter X instead of the system 8
I was really thinking about moving to a Jupiter X from the System-8, but I agree, that's not going to be an option for me now. I'm underwhelmed with the ABM Zen-Core models, both from a user interface/sound design aspect, as well as the end result.
@@ScottsSynthStuff Please never get rid of the System-8!!! You'll thank Uncle Jerry someday! :)
@@unclejerrysworld I would miss the native System 8 synth engine, which I love and use all the time!
VERY nice and well done comparison, thx!
Hi Scott, as always, a very interesting job. Thank you.
I'm not sure to get good ears enough to recognize one from the 4. Yet, one seems to be apart : the Fantom. I can hear some real differences.
I've red some comments from different people saying that the Zen Core system produces a less good emulation than the other one.
(I'm not sure but I think that the System 8 can export digital audio with USB output).
Another thing too : it would have been great if you could have the Behringer Deepmind 12, because it is supposed to be a re-creation og the Juno 106. Plus, we can get the original Juno factory sounds in it ! It wouild have been easy to compare the both.
Thank again and please : go on this kind of video.
You're correct that the System-8 can send digital audio, although it requires that it be an ASIO interface, and on Windows, you only get one ASIO interface allowed - so if you're already using an ASIO interface for your audio interface, you can't use a second one from a synth. That's the trouble with all these synths that offer this type of functionality.
I've thought about having a DM before, but have not bought one for exactly the reason you state - it duplicates a lot of what I already have.
@@ScottsSynthStuff Thanks for these precise informations about the System 8.
About the DM, there are some big differences with Juno, though : The DM has a powerful and versatile effects unit (up to 4 effects from 35 algorythms), a powerful modulation matrix (8 entries), a Control Sequencer, etc...
So the DM can do what the Juno does but many more things too !
I'm not a DM seller !! But among other big units I'm playing (as Kronos, Montage, etc...) this "little" DM 12 is really great and really worth it, in my opinion. But perhaps you wouldn't appreciate it, I don't know !
@@liviou2004 I agree, the Deepmind has an excellent collection of digital effects. I saw Dan Burton (from Behringer) playing a DM12 live when he was touring with Howard Jones and Midge Ure last year.
👍🙏💚🧡thanks, always hard to compare Roland's generations. Note Kebu prefer work directly on his real synths, not to recorded analogs, as he have a Juno 60, and a SH2000, and a bunch of other new Rolands. Sounds are not the same conception.
I have a Juno 6 (of course the HPF slider is to change or to repair, I did not notice it's a multi steps. I have a Roland SH 2000 too, one of the first Roland, a Jupiter 50, and a Behringer Deepmind 12 D, a very good instrument if you take off the effects first, but have it's particularity. So I would say the Juno 6 is an analogic reference and others are in the same family, very complementary. Anyway, with any preset, life is an everyday new adventure and being never bored on the SH 2000, i use a composer and some effects, it's a old instrument that I will have to open, but working well. The Juno need the HPF to be revised, and some little thing like missing slider caps, and the vertical top of the wheel broken. I will change nothin if everything works, I will have a look to the power supply, but, I'm anyway to replace it to be powered by solar low current, will see. My project is to be mobile and integrate everything in racks mobile by ten minutes. I'm now to set the different ideas in three racks, with everything in them, the cover being euroracks, and modular, and trying to take off maximum metal and cables. Not easy but I never do things simply.😱 So in same occasion, thanks for the repair videos 🙋 love when you taken the voltage current, I'm abounded too for those sort of mistake.
One of my rack is to mount together a Yamaha Dx7 , Tx7, a key bed CME uf70, and a computer for sysex, and two additional Behringer midi key bed controlers, perhaps a Dx 21 keyboard + expander separately making a FM synthesis programmable ensemble. The idea is to use the best of the sound Yamaha had contribute to in this multivoices system. In the same idea, I don't want to modifie the Juno 6, only make it sound like originally. I have for year the complete technical schemes to do that, will see. The SH2000 will perhaps have some additional things, but originally having portamento, growl effect and randon, and fixed presets, so I hope finding variable resistors, to renew some presets☺️
for system8 acb compare : As hardware as its own d/a which is reconverted to a/d by my interface for daw (steinberg ur824) this double conversion alter the signal. I personnaly, in the case of hardware and vst identicals ,and for permit switch software/hardware with no difference of sound, I take grand time to choose the audio cable (jack). they can really change the sounding and i choose the cables that give the same harmonic/frequency range, dybamism... it take time but until now, i've always founded the good matching...
Great video. Personally, I think the Fantom models are just gimmicks. All they seem to do is limit the Zencore engine in the ways the originals are. I don’t even use them anymore as you can get close enough to the sounds of the originals with just the Zencore engine. ACB sounded more analog to me. I never had a 106… but I did a comparison with the DM12, S8, Jupiter Xm and Fantom for my own personal curiosity. The S8 sounded the best when using the choruses, but the DM12 was just as good otherwise. If only had the money for one instrument to give my studio a Roland vibe… it would be the DM12, probably. 🤷🏻♂️🤣
I 100% agree, the "model expansions" seem to be to be little more than templates laid on top of Zen Core to try to make the various filters, oscillators etc. sound like the original synth. The ACB models are so clearly superior.
The DM12 is an underrated powerhouse of a synth.
Firstly, I havent use any of them in my live. My initial thought was the best is number 2, then number 4, then 3 and 1. The system 8 very close to the original... (note: For the first test)
The Juno-X uses Analog Behaviour Modelling (ABM), which Attack Magazine writes: "they use a virtual analog synthesis system that the company calls Analog Behavior Modeling (ABM). This is less exact than Analog Circuit Behavior (ACB), which powers the Roland Cloud plugins, but less exact also means less CPU taxing so Roland is able to get much more polyphony out of it (up to 256 notes)."
So I guess the Juno-X will sound closer to the Fantom than the real Juno (or the ACB models). It's a shame, I wish Roland would make the Juno-X in the same spirit as Sequential's Prophet 5 rev 4; with true, actually analog hardware.
Right...I explained ABM and ACB in the video.
The Juno-X should sound identical to the Fantom, as it is the exact same engine. Same goes for the Jupiter-X and every other Zen-Core based synth. They're all the exact same engine, with different hardware user interfaces.
As an original 106 owner going back to 1985 I was able to pick it out of the first two examples. The third one I missed. I think the original just sounds a BIT dirtier. And the chorus seemed like a factor. Cool video and I think the emulations are incredibly close. So much so that it probably wouldn’t matter in a mix.
Listened only on phone speakers and there I could only figure out which one is the Fantom, which is no surprise as I compared Softube ( which I liked the most), Roland Cloud and Zenology Pro (ZenCore engine) and the latter one just did not cut it.
Not even on headphones, I was right on #1 and #3, but was 50% on #2 (I couldn’t decide between 2 which was the real 106). The real 106 sounds a little warmer and not so “crisp.”
The 1st and 2nd, I ended up preferring the FANTOM!! …then the 3rd, for bass, Fantom came last.
I’m in disbelief I prefer the Fantom!
For the most part I feel you really have to know the original synth very well for it to matter. I picked the sounds of the 106 on 2 of the 3 parts by just listenning what sounded most soft and I have never had or played a 106. But as you say, even the different iterations of opamp's used in many of those 80's Roland Synths and the later iterations of MKS models sound slightly different just because many of those MKS models used newer and more stable opamps than the original synth models. A nice test. I'm pretty sure, even the Fantom is a bit off, many fans of Roland gear is gonna be happy with it for live use, and the listeners is not gonna be able to tell the difference anyway. I think we are moving into beeing almost freakish about these things and even a used 106 is nearing redicolous prices today just of the hype. And how many musicians is willing to drag a crap load of retro gear around even you can afford to buy it and keep it in pristine condition just for that last realism. Yeah I can tell a real Hammond B/C/A model any day even clones is darn good today, But god damn it, I have tried hauling a B3 around and nothing is worth what that does to your back suree 🥵
I got the cloud and juno right 2 out of 2 times that I participated. Never really heard the phantom so couldn't say for sure. The VST is always a bit more bright and somewhat thinner sounding or perhaps more Eq'ed and mix ready? Good stuff!
Can you share the settings for the second patch? Really dig it
Until I'm able to have another option, starting with a more powerful computer, I'll start with the Zenology models. Close enough is fine for me plus I get a XV5080 emulation which I can use as a former JV1080 user
I could pick out the Fantom 6 as it didn't sound like the other 3. But, tough time distinguishing between the other 3.
I am listening through dac/amp and speakers...and original Juno has the warmest sound to me. Other ones are quite similar. I have 106 in my Fantom 8 so can recognize that one also. Mixed up cloud and System 8
Cloud and System 8 should not sound differently as that is supposed to be the same engine.
@@mudi2000a That`s why i had mixed up those two...could not hear the difference.
I could hear the difference between the two in my studio with the original track, but now that CZcams has had its way with processing my video, I can no longer hear it.
@@ScottsSynthStuff I don’t have System 8 so i can not give a try. But i set my eyes on Juno X ...actually i have ordered one but it's stuck at dhl warehouse because i am at work during delivery time and during opening time. So frustrating sometimes.
@@ScottsSynthStuff Perhaps. I've played the originals, and was no more impressed than with the VST.
If CZcams processed it, how do you think it would sound in the mix of a live band through a PA system? I'd think not one person in the audience that would be able to pickup on the differences, or care because it's barely noticeable. Not like a big tonal difference, like say, the difference between a Juno 106 and an Oberheim OB-X for example. Try making those thick lead sounds on a Juno 106. Not gonna happen. But with a VST, we could capture the character of that thick sound even if the fidelity differences could vary. And still, unlikely anyone in the audience would pick up on it.
Wow the resonant pad xxx too many differences to discuss my head spinning. Each one different …
best comarison video, thanks
Yaaay, C64 T-shirt! \o/
Thanks, in 1 and 3 i missed in 2 i had all right.These days i ask myself more which ones do i like the most as a Juno106. Gave all examples points and the Juno and Fantom i liked the most the vst and System 8 not so much it seems.Had a Juno 106 and Juno60 in the 90s, was more into the Juno60
Nice video but you forgetting one little feature on the system 8 called "Tone" in the VCA section
This feature alone makes the system 8 sounding warmer and darker or the opposite.
A genius idea for a virtual synth and also the parameter "Condition" in the menu...
Ive owned Juno-106 since 1988 and I sold 2 of them and now with the system 8 and the 2 boutique Ju6(a) in chain mode you're getting 8 voice Juno.
I never compared the Cloud to the System 8 but how can you exchange patches exectly? Is it saved in the same format?
Hey Scott, what make and model is that 3 x Tier keyboard stand? Do you find it wobbles?? It looks exactly what I’m looking for in my studio 😊
It's in the description:
My keyboard Z stand: amzn.to/3Ix5xuF
Z stand extra tier: amzn.to/3XtVpa6
I guessed the Juno 106 on the first patch quite easily because its envelopes are noticeably less snappy than the other synths.
Hi Scott - I saw the link for the extra tier on the Z-Stand, however it looks like you have some extra stabilization compared to the one on your link? For reference, I'm trying to put a DX7 on bottom, Juno 106 in the middle, and a Pro One on top. Thanks!
Yes - with three synths on it, it was a little bit...tippy for my liking. I replaced the two horizontal feet with ones that were about 1.5 feet longer (sticking out the back) and also made a little third leg that helped support the back, in the middle. It made it much more stable.
I am on the Roland cloud and have a choice to pick a lifetime key for the Roland 106 vs 60. Actually two keys but one I have chosen the system 8. If you were going to make that choice what would you pick the 106 or 60 on the cloud and a real instrument.
thanks for your nice work
I would really like to know why the 'CONDITION' parameter has a central zero and negative and positive values.
What do the negative values mean? I believe the positive ones are for simulating aging of the circuits, and zero should be for no change, that is, without any effect.
But what about the negatives? No one explains that. What do negative values of CONDITION mean?
Easiest way to spot the OG Juno 106 - listen to the noise floor . easy as that :)))
Not really. The noise floor is only when the chorus is engaged, and all the Roland emulations of the 106 actually include that noise when you enable the chorus - although you can switch off that noise aspect of the emulation if you want.
I didn't do so well... 😅
The VST I could spot in the first two, but not on the third. The Fantom I got on the second and third, after hearing how it sounds on the first. That were them all.
I blame my old ears. 😉
System 8 is also real phatty in lower frequencies...
Great comparison!
i could pick the original even through my cellphone speaker. surprised tho that the system 8 was also pleasing. the cloud version is easily distinguished as thin sounding. for me, it was about the depth of the sound character
The System-8 is just a killer synth.
Thank you Scott, for the comparison of all 4 models! Have you tried using a sustain pedal with the Cloud version? I just can't make it work properly... 😕 on any PC I've tried!?
I’d be curious to hear the Jupiter XM comparison
great work thanks !
Cool t-shirt 😀
The System 8 is awesome, it has the warmth of the analog Juno...on the plugin side, I think the Softube Model 84 is the closest, if not dead on emulation I have used.
Thank you Scott. Awsome stuff here, and the effort is amazing.
I was very surprised by the Juno 106 expansion in the Fantom. I was disappointed by the System-8 though. I could have sworn that synth sounded so much better when I heard other videos of it, but yeah, the Juno 106 is very crisp and clear, and the Fantom 6 is average overall. The Fantom 06 does best with strings, bells and bass sounds in my opinion. The synths and the choir/instruments are lacking a little bit of something, but their not too bad.
If I could go back, I think I would have returned the Fantom 06 though. Overall, the sounds are just not to my liking. There is probably 1 out of every 20 some sounds that I actually like or will use. It's a very weird and strange synth, especially with the way they make you save the patterns/scenes. I do not like it at all.
I just wish they would have stuck with just patterns to save the overall instrumental like the Roland JD-XI, which is an amazing piece of gear. It's my favorite synth ever. The JD-XI is something else for the little it has, but the drum kits sound amazing and can't be beat.
I don't know what's up with the drum kits on the Fantom 06, but they are just not the same. I really wish that they would have just put the JD-XI drum kits into the Fantom 06, and it would have been so much better. Thanks again. I love your videos.
I really like when you compare sound on different synth. But for what is emulation or copy of same kind of sound usefull ? Since i use synth in 80th i didn't use raw sound of any synth. I allways used a minimum of reverb or other dsp to fit to smoother sound i like. A sound who fit to what i like is way more usefull . Sound should only be inpiration. Why should i cook same bad burger at home like big brands , when i can do much better with imagination ? All music we are listening have effect, we only know wich synth is used because it was writen on the cover of our vinyl.
Funny, I picked the System 8/Cloud versions every time. 😂
For the first one i thought 1 or 4 sounded best
Same..... I thought it was the hardware Juno-106 for #1 and System 8 for #4.......
I just bought the Juno X and sold my 106.
Great comparisons. The real 106 was fairly easy for me to pick out -- perhaps because I owned one for 6 years and still have recordings from the 80s. The System 8 is almost as easy to ID -- because it sounds like it's trying too hard to be analog. I wasn't able to distinguish the Fantom from the Cloud version. Any of these would work in a mix for most people. It's likely just us synth needs that notice the differences.
i have Roland Juno 106, System 8 and Roland JU-06A. I love the Sound from JU-06a more :) for me the best Juno 106 & 60 Emulator. But only 4 Voice.
The JU-06 actually has the exact same ACB engine as the Juno-106 plugout in the System-8, so apart from the System-8 having more voices, they should sound the same.
@@ScottsSynthStuff , Roland JU-06A have better Fliter / Reso and ENV ADSR quicker more Beef. I have all 3 System in my Studio. Same @ Sh 101 Plug out and System 8. Roland Sh01a Sound better, better Fliter Reso and ENv ADSR are quicker, more Beef.
@@djsteve2424I also noticed the Ju06a envelopes and filter is a bit different from the system 8. I love both!
The Juno 106 sound on the JU-06a comes in the Plug Out acb version that you can purchase and import as a plug out synth, into the Roland System-1 25 key ACB 4 voice synth as it’s 2nd Synth!
The System-1 is a really good synth in it’s own right too, for low cost. 😊
System 8 is the beast
i thought that the fantom sounded best on each, but yea, it wasn't the same,
If it sounds good I'll use it! It's all about the sound period! Rick Wakeman and Keith Emerson said the same thing or your cheating yourself! Perfection is a false challenge! Do you think you can perfect perfection? When your working that way your a fool in a fools paradise and 5hat leads to extreme anger!
In the first two tests, I chose the Fantom 6 each time! Oh dear. 🤦♂
I was prepared for all my guesses to be wrong. I am not an analog snob and I don't assume my ears are magic. I did not use headphones.
Test 1. I had no guesses one way or another. I probably should have used headphones, especially for this.
Test 2. All I could tell was that the Phantom was the odd man out and most likely an emulation.
Test 3. I really suspected 3 was the real Juno. Some degree of subtle wonkiness in the lower mids.
Of course, joke's on all of us, you've lied in this video, they were ALL emulations and you'll reveal who's REALLY who in a follow up video. ;)
haha that would be great for an April 1st video - GUESS THE ANALOG SYNTH, and none of them are!
Jeepers, there are some decent things on Roland Cloud but subscriptions seem just a step away from ransomware
They sound very close
there is no "warm sound" 😅 I bet, not a single person can tell the difference in a song with a pad, lead or bassline. And what we do with synths? Of course, we made songs. 😉
Maybe you can not...but some people can ( when i wrote ``warm`` what i meant is not as sharp as other ones ...and i wrote that after only first sample )
Most of the time „warm sound“ can be achieved either by subtle saturation and/or putting on a high shelf at minus a few dB.
100%
@@TheBebe666 show me, ther is no one. The songs nowadays are way to much compressed and way too loud. Please, show me a singe human that can identify 5 of 5 songs with analog synths vs digital.
I think Warm may mean old. If we listened to a new juno 106 in the 80s it probably sounded "too bright"
Wow, WTF? I was absolutely sure #1 was the real Juno and #2 which apperently IS the real Juno totally sucks to me. Was absolutely the worst sound of all of them.
Albo 106 albo system 8. Reszta do kitu.
Scott you really wasted your money on all those digital recreations of the original.😢
I actually bought the System-8 to give me a Jupiter-8 and Juno-106, years before I had the actual Juno-106. The Fantom was for something completely different, and I honestly don't regularly use the model expansions inside of it.
The Juno 106 isn't an expensive synth. I have one and I've never wondered if it really sounds like a Juno 106. I never speculated on how close it was. Indeed, I have a Studiologic Sledge 2.0 and can make it sound like most anything. The difference between a non-106 is always knowing it isn't the real thing, even the boutiques. So just buy a Juno 106. They don't cost that much.