|Synth Site: Roland: Juno-G: User reviews Add review|
|Average rating: 3.9 out of 5|
|page 1 of 3: 1 2 3 >>>|
|Hupe, Jean Paul a hobbyist user from Belgium writes:|
Cet instrument, tellement vanté (sûrement par des non-professionnels), est pour moi un total désastre. Les sons pré-enregistrés sont trash, réellement crasseux, voire insupportables. Et surout, l'instrument semble cruellement manquer de basses profondes. A chier. Cet instrument n'a pas de corps, aucun relief. C'est juste une invention technique pour faire plaisir à des DJ en mal de sons étranges ... et capables de palier à l'absence de basses. Roland met des ingénieurs du son venant de partout dans la danse histoire de créer de nouveaux sons. Et à ce niveau en tout cas, c'est devenu une véritable catastrophe. Techniquement parlant, ce super fameux Juno-G ne fait que des problèmes. Il vous faut un temps énorme pour arriver à comprendre son informatique, et quand vous arrivez à la maitriser raisonnablement bien, on se rend compte que ce parcours du combattant n'a servi qu'a vous déçevoir encore plus. Juno-G, une espèce d'animal conçu pour faire plaisir à des producteurs à-la-con sans fric. Un animal de studio bien sûr. Ce n'est absolument pas un instrument pour de réels musiciens. Rien de chez rien en cette matière.
|Rating: 0 out of 5 posted Monday-Sep-12-2011 at 14:15|
|tizio a professional user from uk writes:|
this keyboard is killer value! In 18 years I have owned many synth workstations and the Juno G is miles forward than anything I have owned before. Great sounds, a well specified sequencer, and , unheard of at this price, a sampler, and a complete audio multitracker complete with full editing and display of waveforms. This is like a Tascam 4 track digital audio recorder built into the keyboard. At this price you won't find anything else like that. The sounds are great, I like particularly the organs and many of the orchestral sounds. How did Roland pull this off? There's another reviewer here who's incredibly negative about this keyboard, according to him is a huge step BACKWARD. Try the Juno G for yourself and look at some pro videos on youtube, and see for yourself. Believe the hype because this workstation is just an amazing deal, for great features and price it can't be beaten!
|Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Saturday-Oct-23-2010 at 05:36|
|Andre Louis a part-time user from London, England, UK writes:|
I bought the Juno-G not having even played one, from a guy on ebay for a very reasonable price. Being a Roland fan anyway, I was very surprised and pleased to get this keyboard and find out how good the sounds are. My only complaint to be honest is the keyboard, and as has been stated by others, it's lack of aftertouch. I had a Korg Trinity and it had a much nicer keyboard, but the sounds? well we won't go there. Dated doesn't begin to cut it. The juno-G has half the wave-rom of Roland's Fantom X, but that does not mean half the wave forms. Really it's only missing the Fantom X grand piano and a couple of other things that are easily obtainable by using a CF or Smat media card, some ram, and some editing experience. Oh and Google of course. I have the Fantom X piano in my Juno-G as a user rhythm set, despite the fact that Roland did not add multi-sampling to the juno-G, well not technically anyway. It's all about the rhythm sets. If you want to multi-sample, that is the way to do it.
I also, as a professional Jazz pianist bought Roland's SRX-11 Complete Piano board and quite frakly, combined withthe MFX in the Juno-G feel that I'm playing a piano I am proud to call mine. It was worth the money I spent on it. It takes very little time to complain which is what a lot of people do, but if they give the keyboard a chance, a *proper* chance, they'd find it was actually worth it.
I sequence via the USB port, not particularly caring for on-board sequencers, I'd much rather work from the computer end, as I can incorporate soft synths as well, and I find that Roland sounds mix far better than either Yamaha or Korg sounds in situations. Yamaha might have Super ARticulation this and that, however for mixing, no. Solo, yes. But who wants to sit there for 5 hours a day playing a Super ARticulation III Saxophone just because they can? Not me. I need it to mix with the rest of the instruments I play, not show off like some 14 year old child who can play extremely well, but not with others. For this reason, Roland sounds win every single time.
|Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Thursday-Apr-01-2010 at 10:25|
|Synthman a hobbyist user from uk writes:|
I have played, and owned many synths over the years, but in my opinion, this is the worst. Forget all the hype, and the Roland name. Roland have taken a giant step backwards. Ok, it has a 16 track sequencer, But the sounds are awful, even with tweeking, they are not dynamic enough, and lack, the brightness, of older rolands.
All you ever seem to see on demos of this board, is the Grand piano. It's as though thats all it is. and, it's, one of the worst iv'e ever heard and, lacks the tone and depyh of a real one, by a millon miles theres no comparison.
I found I was only using one patch, for song writing, but, found it nvery uninspiring, and irratating.
Roland seem to have a habit, of producing brilliant synths, that have been classics, and cant be beaten, Then they bring out synths that are a real let down, like this.Why, cant they stick to a winning formula.
The D beam is just a gimmick, and, not really realisticaly usable. the strings, are very poor, as the patches. My trusty Triton is, miles better has more bite, and sparkle, nice pads the lot.
They claim, mit has the same engine as the Fantom.If this is true, I dont want one either. in general. I feel, as though Roland just put this together quickly, to put it on the market. To me a synthesizer, has synth sounds, If you want the usual organ, violin, flute, get a home keyboard, it will probably sound much better.
I only had mine a few weeks, but, got rid, a big disopointment. Save your money, or buy a Korg, or Yamaha or something. a giant step backwards from Roland.
|Rating: 1 out of 5 posted Friday-Jun-19-2009 at 18:10|
|Sven a part-time user from Spain writes:|
IÂ´ve had the Juno G for over a year now and unfortunately IÂ´m nowhere satisfied with it.Of course I got swindled by itÂ´s attractive pricetag.ItÂ´s a hard beast to tame and not "hands-on",as they claimed it to be.If you obsessively pull yourselves through it,you might get some chops out of it,but still youÂ´re limited to dated memory-cards,expensive SRX-exp.-boards etc...Oh!And donÂ´t let it drop!ItÂ´s price must be in itÂ´s light material!Some sounds are good,some are shamelessly crappy.IÂ´d rather study Japanese than the manual.Sorry folks;Bad deal...
|Rating: 2 out of 5 posted Monday-May-12-2008 at 09:56|
|page 1 of 3: 1 2 3 >>>|