Roland JU-06 Synthesizer Sound Examples

roland-ju-06-synthesizer

Roland product specialist Ed Diaz shared this video sound demo of the new Roland JU-06 synthesizer module:

The video doesn’t go into any discussion of the synth, but instead focuses on offering a wide range of audio examples what the new JU-06 is capable of.

The JU-06 is an emulation of the iconic Juno-106 synthesizer. The 4-voice JU-06 features 23 parameters controllable via the front panel and, according to Roland, ‘classic Juno sound’.

There are some new additions too, including a faster LFO and continuously variable hi-pass filter (HPF).

The Roland JU-06 Synthesizer Module has a street price of about US $299. See the Roland site for more info.

53 thoughts on “Roland JU-06 Synthesizer Sound Examples”

  1. It sounds like a 106. And it’s only $300. The only thing I’m not sure about is editing on such a tiny front panel. The hands in this video look like they belong to a giant.

    1. that’s why they used a midi controller with it. it would have been amusing to see little hands with fat fingers play with the mini keys, though. 😀 but the synth sounded really good.

    2. I think that it wants to sound like…but at the end it is not a Juno 106. It is like DCO-6 . It also sounds like it want to be a Juno, but it is not a 106 (and it is free). If you are tempted to buy one, it is because you want one. I recommend that you better go for the real one or a clone…never accept something that wants to sound like…IMHO

      3. You can’t lose if you’ve got good material.

        Yes, I have picked up the torch for the anti-mini keys movement I’m confident that laws can be passed barring the importation of anything with mini keys.

    3. Yeah 199 would be nice, but while we’re having this conversation, 89 would be even better. Hell, Roland should be giving me 30 bucks just to take one of these.

      Now, seriously: How on earth is this a $199 product? What else costs 199 that this is comparable to, or what else costs 299 that is so much better?

  4. Sorry, I’ll pass on the whole Boutique series.
    Lesser voices than the originals and totally no midi CC implementation whatsoever.
    Even my 1984 Juno 106 can be controlled by sysex.

      1. Sysex for patch dumping or for real time parameter control? If the latter, do you know if it transmits them as well when a slider is moved?

          1. Right, so you currently possess a 06 and have confirmed this for yourself right?

            Or are you going by the post on GS where a guy posted a claim about it sending sysex parameters in note overflow mode and gave a non-standard Roland sysex format with a model identifier of 0.

              1. Ad hominem from you now?

                Please answer the question. Do you possess a 06? Have you confirmed these claims that you are spamming to every thread? Or have you not?

                1. 1. I have not personally confirmed the exact sysex messages that are sent.

                  2. “Spamming” implies unsolicited. For the past few days I’ve posted in response to that question, which is frequently repeated in comments on this site.

                  3. Have you confirmed that the devices CAN’T be automated? Because that’s what you have posted, based on what appears to be an omission from some preliminary spec sheets.

                  To be fair, I admit I should not post about this so matter-of-factly. I have not confirmed this functionality myself, I have only seen (strong) evidence of it posted on another forum. So let’s put this on ice for a couple of days when we see something really concrete (like a demo) to prove or disprove this contentious issue.

                  In the interim, I’m open to wagers. 🙂

                2. I bought a JX-03 on the night of Oct. 22. Today I finally had a chance to test this. Here’s what I found:

                  The knobs send sysex only while the unit is in chain mode. The device will respond to sysex regardless of whether it is in chain mode.

                  Unfortunately, MIDI data coming in on the Roland’s input seems to always be repeated at the output. So to set this unit up with your DAW, you must:

                  (1) Set the DAW to filter out notes that come from the Roland. This prevents an endless loop of note data.
                  (2) Set the DAW to not echo MIDI data to the Roland while recording. This will prevent an endless loop of sysex data while recording.
                  (3) Put the unit into chain mode when you want to transmit knob movements. Take the unit out of chain mode when you want to play back normally, without the risk of notes being missed.

                  If you wish to record tweaking on top of tweaking (i.e. play with the filter cutoff on one take, then play with the envelope on another take), you must either:

                  – “mute” the sysex that you recorded first pass. Otherwise, its data will be recorded will be re-recorded with the knobs on the second pass. This is not ideal, because you won’t be able to hear the initial tweaks while you record the next tweaks.

                  OR

                  – don’t mute the sysex that you recorded on the first pass. The data will be duplicated in the recording of the second pass. After you have recorded the second pass, delete the data from the first pass (or else it will be playing back twice). This is not ideal, because the initial tweaking may not have identical timing when re-recorded into your sequencer.

                  So… the answer is … yes, you can automate the front panel controls from your external MIDI sequencer, but there are a few annoyances. I did my testing on the JX-03, but it is reasonable to assume my findings will apply to the JU-06 and the JP-08 as well.

                  I’ll post more details on my web site, with a demo video of how to do this with Logic, sometime next week.

    1. Why would you want it to be bigger?

      It seems some imagine the size has some relevance to the sound.

      All it would do is take up more space in your studio.

  9. As soon as he opened up the filter all the way at the start of the vid I thought ot sounded like a VA. Diva sounds better than this. Pass.

  10. These are great & interesting little products, but the 4-note polyphony (same as the Aira) really puts me off. I’m waiting for Roland to upgrade to some CPUs with a bit more oomph!

  11. I cut my programming teeth on a friend’s Juno 60 and I had an Alpha Juno 2, and this video sure brought back a lot of memories. The replication is very accurate indeed. Has anyone done an A/B comparison with the TAL U-NO? I have the TAL but I think I will get myself one of these little ones anyway…

  13. i don’t see any return in these over the long run, they are just a glorified rompler that uses algorithms rather than samples, they will be on ebay after the depth of their capabilities is exhausted by the owner in a short while.

    any body interested in a bit of economics on why companies like roland choose to release money for old rope products rather new innovations here is a video that can enlighten you. https://vimeo.com/75323312

    1. How can it be a glorified Rompler when it doesn’t use samples?? A Rompler by definition has to use samples doesn’t it?

      There are plenty of people who buy old synths on ebay with limited capablilities. There is plenty of choice if you want more complex synths. In fact there is probably more choice of gear and at cheaper prices than ever before. If you want an amazing poly analog go spend a few grand on a Modal. That looks like a beast but you pay the price. I don’t have £6000 for a Jupiter 8 or whatever the going rate is but I do have a couple of hundred I could spend on a close sounding hardware/software replica. If it inspires me to make more music and have some fun then that’s all that matters.

      There is obviously demand for these products and given the resurgence in old tech from the likes of Korg and Yamaha it makes sense for a company like Roland who have a large range of “classic” and popular old gear to make something like these, why wouldn’t they do this? Companies have to make money to survive and smaller products generate cash to make bigger products e.g. Monotron and the MS-20 mini.

      Personally I don’t buy gear primarily for its legacy or how accurate it is to the original. I buy gear because its something I am missing from my current setup and because I think it will inspire me to make more/better music. Do you think people won’t like your music because it doesn’t have an authentic Jupiter 8 or Juno 106 on it? I think the vast majority probably can’t tell or don’t care.

    2. Thats completely BS, sorry to tell you. Even microkorgs have maintained worth over the last 10 years due to their size, ease of use, and decent analog emulation. These will, at the very least, maintain their value. Period. At most (if they are really as limited as everyone seems to think) they will actually rise in value, regardless of the pretensions of ‘analog-minded’ individuals such as yourself. As the comment about them being romplers makes absolutely no sense, thats like saying acoustic instruments are basically just romplers that create samples instead of just playing them (lol).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *