Synth Site: Roland: Juno 60: User reviews Add review
Average rating: 4.6 out of 5
page 9 of 16:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  >>>
Marquisate d' Estelle a professional user from Memphis, TN, USA writes:
I owned the 6, 60, and now the 106 as well as the weird Alpha Junos. I regret that I got rid of the 60 and am looking for another one. The 106 doesn't seem as purely analog as the 60. It does sound cruder and cuts through a mix well. The sounds are typically more expansive and moving whereas the 106 sounds cleaner with less overall sound activity on the typical sound.

The great thing about the 60 and these others is that they are great "Swiss Army Synths". You can make them do all kinds of little sounds to squeak in here and there or cover some serious turf. You find yourself tweaking and actually getting something serviceable out of the deal, it's forgiving and fun. They are certainly not the fattest or the most powerful or the smoothest sounding synths. But they cover alot of bases and are very useful in electronica.

Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Friday-Sep-24-1999 at 09:43
nubey a professional user from USA writes:
I've owned both a 6 and a 60

For mono mode just hold the transpose button while powering up and you get all six osc's synced to one note, great for fat basses or screaming leads -- ugh very passe terminology (I know).

Also of note: Sample the juno while in mono mode for some super huge pad's on your sampler -- esp. good if you have a controller setup that will allow you to raise or lower the resonance and cutoff settings on your sampler, this is almost juno overload.

Hope this helps all the juno newbies out there. FYI: Juno 6's sound a little and I mean a little fatter than the 60's (who knows why -- they're damn near the same board)

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Thursday-Sep-23-1999 at 16:09
Marcus a professional user from Madison, WI writes:
The Juno 60 is my favorite of any keyboard I've owned so far (Ensoniq ESQ-1/SQ-80, Korg Wavestation, Kurzweil K2000, Yamaha DX-7, Korg DW 8000 ). There is a slider, button, or switch for every parameter on the synth, making patch generation a breeze, and allowing for some great real-time manipulation of the sound. Although it only has one oscillator, you can get an amazingly fat sound by using the phenominal chorus effect. Great for pads, basses and effects, but suffers slightly in the lead department due to the lack of a mono mode and portamento. When I purchased this synth a month or two ago, the filters were pretty out of tune. Upon opening the top cover, I found that the filter tuning pots are all nicely laid out and easy to get to.

DCO: The digital pitch control of the oscillator is quite fast (the waveforms are generated with analog circuitry). It seems to perform without any noticable skips even if it's being modulated with the fastest setting on the LFO. Two waveforms, saw and pulse (pulse width can be adjusted manually, by the LFO or the envelope generator), plus a sub oscillator and noise generator. The pitch may be modulated by the LFO and bender.

VCF/HPF: The VCF is a four pole - 24dB low pass filter. It is one of the best I've ever heard, boasting self-oscillation for amazing squeals and effects, and sweeps using the LFO or the envelope generator are smooth and clean. The filter can be modulated by the envelope generator, the LFO, or keyboard tracking. Other modulation contols include the bender and a control voltage input for alternate real-time filter control (my Ensoniq CV pedal works very well for this). A high pass filter (HPF) is also included, with four preset cuttoff settings, and has no resonance or ability to be modulated.

VCA: Contains a gain control and the ability to be modulated either by the envelope generator or a note-on/note-off gate.

ENV: Standard ADSR envelope generator. The envelope generator is quite fast, allowing for extremely punchy basses and manic filter sweeps.

LFO: This is the only non-descrete section on the synth (only one LFO for all six voices) and has one waveform - triangle. It has controls for rate and delay, and can be set to be either always on (delay is triggered when a key is depressed), or manually on/off using LFO trigger button above the bender.

Arpeggiator: Very simple, but fun, arpeggiator with rate control, range (0 to 2 octaves), and type (up, down, up & down).

The Juno 60 has no MIDI capabilities, but it does support the proprietary pre-MIDI Roland DCB (Digital Control Bus). A CDB->MIDI converter is available from Kenton Electronics, and bosts a second LFO which can be sent into the VCF control voltage input, and the LFO's waveforms include variations of triangle, saw, pulse, square, and sample+hold (!!!). The LFO can also be synced to a MIDI clock.

The keyboard is not velocity sensitive, and feels pretty springy and fragile. It has the ability to store 56 programs, along with a tape save option.

All in all, the Juno 60 performs excellently as a flexible analog synth with plenty of fat, punchy potential. They're rather difficult to find these days, but they should be obtainable for between $200 and $350, depending on their condition. A Juno 106 generally costs a little more because of its excellent MIDI implementation, but most people prefer the raw sound quality of a Juno 60 over a 106.

Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Thursday-Sep-23-1999 at 15:03
David Morley a professional user from germany writes:
I agree that the juno 6/60 beats a 106. Much nicer sounding. I've never had a problem with my 60 so I think the previous reviewers friend is just unlucky. Mine has been used an on everyday for maybe 7 years now and never a problem. If you see one cheap buy it. Well worth it.

Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Saturday-Aug-21-1999 at 06:43
nubey a professional user from USa writes:
Well I don't have a 60 but I do have a Juno-6 which for all purposes is the same keyboard, without the memory patches.

My six sounds big and full, the 60's sound exactly the same. Too bad the 6 has no way to externally control it, as the 60 has some archaic roland DCB connectors on it's backside.

Compared to a 106 (which I own too), the sound is much more analog sounding, probably due to the analog routing of the sounds whereas the 106 used digital routing, (I may be wrong here). The difference in the early juno's compared to the 106's and later is like night and day, truely the Juno6/60 are in a class of their own, and they're fairly cheap and widely available still too.

Warning though, the 60's are a whole lot more susceptible to mechanical problems than the 6, My six acts like it did the day it left the music store, my pals with 60's have had to do regular maintenence to theirs fairly regulary, while my Juno-6 has never seen a repair man ever. Why this is? who knows perhaps it;s shoddy first generation digital circuitry, who knows, and for reference 106's are far worse for repairs than either of the 6 or the 60's. My 106's voice chips have gone out, one a few years ago and one only recently, and there is nothing worse than dropping every 6th note, ack!

Overall a stunning synth, cheap, generally well made, easy to repair, good sounds, noisy noisy chorus, 6 and 60 had syncable appeigators too great if you own a TR drum machine, simple architecture, and great low end. All for $150-400 -- for the price you can't beat them, well the oberheim's 6/1000 come pretty close but what the heck. \

Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Friday-Aug-20-1999 at 14:43
page 9 of 16:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  >>>