Added: 8 months ago
From: Fa7s3
Views: 4,834
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (17)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • For those who think that I used a MIDI controller : look at the audio card ;-)

  • I feel like he's either using one as a MIDI controller for the other, or they sound exactly the same.

  • so, i have very good musical hearing and i didn´t noticed any kind off difference in sound... you are somebody little bit deaf...

  • JX3P have different release

  • would be much clearer if u didnt use the chorus

  • he could just be using it as a midi controller...one of the synths

  • sound totally different 

  • @hershism I'm joking of course ;p

  • Very interesting comparison. Both nice synths. I own a juno 6 and have just bought a jx3p with the pg-200. Initially I thought that the jx3p did not have the quality of the juno but the more I play it the more I like it. The juno has a smoother sound and I prefer the filter but the jx3p has more bass and is more versatile with its 2 dco's. I would say that it has a slightly more aggressive sound. Both nice synths. Jx3p is very under rated and in my opinion. Nice demo

  • There are many differences between the 2 keyboards. JX 2 osc, Juno 1. JX sequencer, Juno none. JX parameters about 30, Juno about 20, Juno 128 programmable memories, JX 32 (32 are preset), Juno Unison and poramento JX none, And there is something about the Juno's filters! The main difference is my JX has been on the road for 30 years and still works not too bad. My Juno has never worked for more than a few months since I bought it in 2006 without needing a voice chip replaced...

  • this would be so much more useful if the audio was direct and not a room mic

  • Do you feel that the JX3P can obtain the same sounds as the Juno 106? You demo shows this, but I mean when doing more complex programming as well. Are there any notice sonic differences?

  • They are both very similar, its just a matter of taste. They both sound dreamy. I prefer the JX over the Juno, that's just me, the JX feels more stable, there is something special going on inside there, its got a unique sound that no other Roland synth has.

  • Don't forget, the JX3P costs another $200+ when you buy the PG200 programmer. Also, the JX3P is less versatile, for example the mod section is just a single button, or the pulse width modulation has to be obtained using a roundabout method similar to the other JX synths, you have to get PWM using cross modulation.

  • hmmm this made me think....do i want a 300$ jx3p... or a 500$juno106..? good vid man!!!

  • With my JX-3P, I can only access channel A, and I can only get to channel C by pressing the "write" button. I also can't turn on/off the chorus button. It's really frustrating not to be able to access channel b+d. It was fine on the day I got it, but somehow I pressed something that made it glitch like this.I actually got it to work today for a few hours for the first time in months, but it soon went back after I messed something up again. Do you know how to reverse this? I hope you can help!

  • @ThePsychoticLamp Have you tried changing the battery? The batteries they put in these things were only designed to last 5 years before being changed although most of them seem to last for 20+ years when they do finally go they can have unforeseen effects on the synth. If the acid has leaked then yo might be able to sort it out by having a clean up but the corrosion might be more serious. Either way replacing the battery isn't a bad idea.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more