But, as already mentioned, after 25 minutes (I had exactly the same interface (the principe) on the JX-8P and the K-3, but here INCREMENT instead of a DIAL --> totally easy in comparison to FM Operators or PHP programming : ( ).

The LFO is not fast enough (only usable as a very slow affect to another function), Sub Osc sounds, well **** and doesn't mix very good with the DCO1 especially when you want to use it of course for sub-bass action, quite the same with the ENSEM function (don't use it, sound will lose power but gets more "fluid" in a bad creamy way, so that the sound is not neutral enough to mix it with other equipment, also it's to easy to recognize the sound (everyone can tell you which synth you have used (but it's the same as with the chorus effect in roland's --> but vintage roland's have more powerful neutral waveforms and 2 settings for chorus)), the CUTOFF is digitally controlled (that means stepping in sound because chips of that era were slow and had poor memory), resonance doesn't cut like on any other vintage synth i used, pulse wave is 2 or 3 times more powerful than saw wave (only 1 saw wave type in DCO1 ?!?) so for people like me who don't like pulse waves for ambient pads instead of pcm realistic sounds or multiple layered saw waves with lfo controlling of each saw wave with wide opened release and 30 percent attack stacked together into a good sounding reverb effect with 50 percent original sound and 50 percent effect sound it's not acceptable even if you use another gear to process the sound afterwards (I maybe did the fault to use the jd-800 before that synth ; ) ), BRASS option adds a better bass sound instead of the sub-osc, DUAL option is **** because upper/lower sound is routed to pan left and right and doesn't interact like a layer between the two sounds (but it's the only way to make a more complex sound or to fatten up a sound when you have two saved sounds with slightly different coarse and fine coarse settings for upper and lower sound (think of the Accent Virus, jesus what a perfect classical synth in matter of sound and flexibilty; ), built-in sequencer doesn't matter because today you can use much better software sequencers or workstations, funny thing is the memory write option together with the keys.

Pros:

- at first it looks quite impressive (wonderful vintage design; looks like a star trek computer interface ; ) ) - 8 Voice analog sound with 3 oscillators - Midi In Out Thru - ENSEM[BLE] Mode (like Chorus) - BRASS - Pulse Width Modulation - SUB Osc - very easy to use (all parameters with leds, no layered or hidden functions) - build quality very sturdy (ok you can hear the springs of the keys, but hey they work ; ) ) - CHEAP VINTAGE

Cons:

- all points which were mentioned before - no matter what you do (even if you shut down all extra options, so that only the basic waves can be heard), it always sounds creamy - can be outperformed by a casio cz in ringmodulation with a cheap added delay or chorus or reverb, especially when you want to use special fx sounds because the sx-240 can't be used for evolving pads or simple pads, fast attack bass-sounds, cutoff sounds, strings or any other sound which sounds good)

Alternatives:

add ca. 40 dollars more and buy a Roland JX-8P (ok only 6 voice, but every voice sounds wonderful vintage (like the powerful and sweet sounds of the old Kim Wilde synth songs and thanks to the roland neutral sound it sits well in the mix even in modern songs), it doesn't matter if a synth has 6 or 8 voices if the voices don't sound good)

Maybe another alternative could be the old matrix-6/r, but I haven't used it (no possibilty till yet). Think of flexible matrix option with reliable dco's, 6 voice and also midi... architecture was used later on the matrix-1000 till 1994 (it says many things if a concept lives more than 5 years, like the jv-workstation pcm concept, the FM-sound or the vector synthesis)...

I don't know, but the sx-240 reminds me heavily on the k-3 in terms of the sound of the filter (only filter, because k-3 uses sampled waveforms), price, the interface and the lack of flexibilty (funny thing, both synths are from the same company...)

Very basic MIDI implementation: you have to give an OMNI OFF message and then it switches to channel 1 - there is NO other way to controll this synth, unless you use midi transpose equipment. It does respond to program change and pitch bend data.

Functionality is OK but not great: just one big dial knob, that can be routed to each function - very clearly printed on the synth's top.

Mine has a problem with one of the ocsillator's VCA enveloppes and I STILL haven't sorted the noise AMP out, but the outside of the synth (all wood and metal) seems sturdy.

I would say it's pretty close to the juno generation, but still (quite unique actually) different in sound from any other synth I have. I do use it a lot actually, but that's also because it's so big (it's almost begging to be used in my tiny studio room...)