sorry I meant that there is no way its better than a Juno 60 ;-)
posted Friday-Nov-24-000 at 12:07
schism
a professional user
writes:
There is no way this thing is better than a Juno 106. As a matter of fact, it sounds quite lame next to one. I will never play a 106 again having purchased one of these.
3/5 because its cheap, easy to program and has midi. Otherwise, blah. Filter is ok for a dco.
Thanks.
Rating: 3 out of 5
posted Friday-Nov-24-000 at 12:04
Robert Rada
from US
writes:
I bought one off of some Beastie Boys tour. I guess even they know, this is the most versatile (and easy to use) synth in history. Said and done. Not even God knows why I sold it. If I had a heroin habit, maybe I'd understand...I guess you do stupid things when you're mearely 17.
Better than a 60. Want an arpeggiator? This things got midi, hook it up to a sequencer. Fatter sound, use some eq. The memory banks make this so lovely.
Rating: 5 out of 5
posted Friday-Nov-24-000 at 06:28
RetroPaul
a hobbyist user
from CA USA
writes:
I have a 60 and a 106 and I wouldn't part with either! Love the Midi on the 106, but couldn't do without the fatness of the 60 and it's arpeggio . Bought my 60 a few years back for 220.00 and my 106 this spring for 380.00 Add these 2 with my Emax II and my Boss 660 and I'm satisfied!
Rating: 5 out of 5
posted Tuesday-Oct-17-000 at 11:20
Disease Factory
a professional user
from usa, colorado
writes:
The juno 106 i think is more versitle than the juno 60, the egs are faster, and it sound is yes a tad thinner, but its easier to put it in the mix, and midi is a big plus, not to mention recording slider movements via midi.. i'll keep my 106, i saw a juno 60 for 250 and passed on it, and it was mint, sounds good but i liek the 106 more..
Rating: 5 out of 5
posted Tuesday-Oct-17-000 at 04:03
listings
