Synth Site: Roland: Juno 60: User reviews Add review
Average rating: 4.6 out of 5
page 2 of 16:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  >>>
Alan Thacker a professional user from USA writes:
I spent hours and hours programming Juno 60's (and Jupiter 8's) in the 1980's in the fashion and influence of Vince Clarke. I have to say...the Juno 60 delivers where the 106 was an entry level synth. If you didn't have access in the studio to a Jupe 8, Prophet 5 or 10...a Juno 60 did just fine. If you have interest, listen to the sounds of original 1982 Depeche Mode's Speak and Spell, Kraftwerk, and Yazoo (Yaz in the USA)and hear the pumping Roland synths! Juno 60 can reproduce. Cheers, Alan

Rating: 0 out of 5 posted Wednesday-May-04-2005 at 21:48
benjamin bear a professional user from USA writes:
This thing is as classic as an NES...I still enjoy my XP-80 a tad more, but I sequence more than I play live. For live shows, the Juno-60 is perfect. It'd be easier with two of them, and for the price you'd pay for a new analog synth, you can pick up four of these. Sadly, I have to sell mine, as I don't have a real use for it anymore. It's still fun, more fun if you have other people to play with. The sounds you can get out of this are amazing, everything from crazy basses to mind-altering noise. I used to have the book for this thing, it told you how to program all the original sounds back, but I've had this thing for over ten years, and I didn't need the book after a month.

On a side note, the XP-80 has a sound called "Saucers," which is patch #75 by default on the Juno-60. The Juno version of this sound is much better...and it's adjustable. You can actually sound like a UFO is taking off, whereas on the XP-80, it's more of an implied UFO.

You can't understand this unless you've used one, though.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Monday-Dec-06-2004 at 02:58
Opinionizin' D from here&there writes:
I just have to mention; everyone says this is much better than a 106, punchier, warmer, etc. Well, let me ask you: why on earth does someone like Wiliam Orbit swear by a 106 and not this one: he only multisamples and rearranges anyway? and furthermore, it is not hard, nor terribly expensive to get the 60 midified, so that's not an argument. Many talk about the punchy basses you get out of this one that the 106 just can't do...this is a very wrong concept forwarded by unskilled, misguided programmers. True it is easier to dig up a very punchy bass on the 60, but, I have myself programmed and stored two bass-sounds in my 106, and, let me tell you, it doesn't get any fatter than this. One of them, when I go into unison, it's phatter than Dolly D and ol' grandma in the height of their career. What I am trying to tell you is, that the 60 and 106 sound similar; the 60 is a little beefier, true, but those phat basses is fully attainable on the 106, believe me, it takes a little more programming, that's all. Also, the 106 has the same warmth and lushness, yet can sound a bit 'thinner' (thin is not really a word I would use to describe any of the Juno's), a good thing, IMO, as these sounds often sits better in the Mix,... and that, my friends, is probably why Mr. Orbit prefers the 106. If you are a musician/keyboardist I would probably recommend the 60, though, as it has a somewhat beefier sound, is more solidly built, and is one of the coolest looking analogues around (it has a decent arpeggiator, too, mind you, but unfortunately no portamento). These words are just me, sharing what I believe to be knowledge. Hopefully, you can do your own thinking (and playing) and judge for yourselves.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Thursday-Aug-26-2004 at 13:01
zeroslug a hobbyist user from United States writes:
very nice piece of vintage gear, and a great synth for beginners to programming. Only has 1 DCO, however u can put all the waveforms together (pulse, saw, sqr sub) and the chorus 1 or 2 makes up for any "lack" of oscillators. The Juno60 is known for its Chorus unit, i never use chorus units except in this synth, it just sounds great! Some of the best filters on this machine, very clean and brassy, great for synth strings. Now if u can find one cheap and in good condition (make sure the keys work) then buy it, the essential 80's synth. No midi, but has DCB and could get it retrofitted. All in all a great lil simple synth.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Friday-Jun-11-2004 at 10:39
Lukasz Barowicz a hobbyist user from Poland writes:
It is a very straightforward piece of gear with a decent interface. Only one DCO+sub+noise, but sounds rich with the onboard stereo chorus (which in fact is somewhat noisy; not a big problem for a hobbyist anyway). Juno is well known for it's bass sounds ( in fact reminding a bit of 303 and the like) leads (no portamento though), synthetic brass and strings (lively).Warm filter, no stepping, it's analog.J60 is also capable of 808-style kicks, hihats... Listen to some of 80's and 90's new romantic/pop/rock/disco to hear it in action.It's inspiring but has it's obvious limitations : it would be a good thing for somebody who wants all-round pop machine or a scratch-pad-synth, for someone who wants to learn subtractive synthesis or just for someone like me interested in synthesizers.Not bad after 20 years, just the keys could be better and the bender could have a wider range. No midi, only DCB; there's a retrofit available. It has few memory banks, but you'd rather make a sound from scratch than use a pre-programmed one.Making new sound takes just few seconds. I've sold mine , it's overpriced now so I made a good deal selling it for >300$. Buy it if you find a cheap one, you can always sell it afterall; techno has made it famous .

Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Wednesday-Mar-24-2004 at 03:48
page 2 of 16:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  >>>