SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

A forum for comparing two or more synths against each other. Also known as "versus" threads.
Post Reply
User avatar
joyfool
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: Portland, OR

SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by joyfool » Fri May 08, 2009 6:47 pm

I can buy one of these set-ups, and I am torn. Other than the obvious differences, any absolute opinions one way or the other? If you could choose just one, which would it be? Also, is it possible to mod the 101 to be compatible with the JSQ? Thanks for looking.

User avatar
Computer Controlled
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 624
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:12 am
Gear: SH-101 . TB-3 . TR-8 . Juno-1 w/PG-300 . TT-303 . Korg ES2 . Beatstep Pro . Pioneer RMX-500
Band: Computer Controlled
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Re: SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by Computer Controlled » Sat May 09, 2009 12:00 am

Why would you want to mod the 101? It's sequencer is essentially a JSQ-60, but monophonic. I personally would rather have the 101 over the Juno. But i like monosynths over polysynths. It comes down to personal preference. What's more useful to you?
Synths:
Avalon Bassline . TB-03 . JU-06 . MX-1 . Blofeld . MicroMonsta . Akai S5000
Drum Machines:
TR-09 . TR-8

User avatar
Jabberwalky
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 2130
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 6:03 pm
Gear: A hybrid of vintage and modern junk
Band: Variar
Location: Pgh, PA
Contact:

Re: SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by Jabberwalky » Sat May 09, 2009 1:35 pm

I have both so I'm not full of s**t. The 101 is by far a better sounding instrument judging by it's raw tone. The Juno has a shitty LFO which is stuck on Triangle and doesn't go very fast at full speed. The 101 lfo can go fast enough for some tripped out FM sounds. Also, getting Midi to the 101 is easier as it has CV gates. The juno has DCB which needs it's own converter.

Umm, yeah. Build quality is pretty obvious. The juno is metal. The juno sliders are much stiffer than the 101 sliders. The pitch bend wheel on the Juno has a very solid feel. The 101 pitch wheel is ok, but the spring back is slower. The advantage to the 101 wheel is the LFO mod when you push it up. IF you crank the LFO mod slider you can actually mod any of the parameters more than the editing sliders allow.

The arp is better on the juno as it can span 3 octaves where the 101 has no octave spans, but again the 101 can trig the arp faster. With the arp speed at 10 you can play NES style chords (its fast enough that they sort of blend together if you squint your ears)

Juno60 patch memory, 101 not....

I dont know man, you need to be more descriptive. I would sell the life size Donna Summers bust and buy both.

User avatar
HideawayStudio
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
Posts: 1387
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 10:41 pm
Real name: Dan Wilson
Gear: 163 tubes in a large wooden box!
Band: Shortwave
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by HideawayStudio » Sat May 09, 2009 1:39 pm

In my case it would have to be get both as 101 and the 60 are totally different beasts. The 101 is one of the finest monosynths around (despite it looking like a toy!) and capable of some really mad sound effects too. The 60 is a lovely warm polysynth capable of some really nice pads and strings...

If you absolutely have to only have one then it would be the SH-101 for me as it's such a unique beast with a very snappy hard edge to it. The Juno could be emulated by a lot more synths of the era. I suppose the final decision would be down to what kind of music you're into.....

User avatar
Z
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 3496
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 3:08 am
Gear: Bubble wrap, Styrofoam, boxes, packing tape
Location: Docking Bay 94 (Dallas, TX)
Contact:

Re: SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by Z » Sat May 09, 2009 3:12 pm

I have both Juno 60 (sans sequencer) and SH-101. Although I prefer my SH-2 over the 101, I'd get the 101 over the Juno. Jabberwalky provided many reasons where the 101 excels, but I love the 101's sequencer - it's hellafun! Program a pattern and use the key transpose! I just wish it would output the key transposition via CV like the 303.

The Juno is capable of some nice, thick pads, though. It all depends on your needs.

User avatar
Sir Ruff
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 3518
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 11:55 pm
Gear: Two persimmon modulators and a frequency adjudicator.
Band: Ruff in the jungle
Location: Washington, DC

Re: SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by Sir Ruff » Sat May 09, 2009 3:47 pm

I think this argument is kind of moot (are we versus-ing monosynths against polysynths now? :roll: ), but if it were me, I'd get the juno. DCOs excepted, you are getting a 6-voice sh-101, with chorus and memories (and envelope PWM). And adding midi will actually cost less than the SH with the right midi>dcb converter. seems like an obvious choice.
Do you even post on vse bro?

User avatar
joyfool
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by joyfool » Mon May 11, 2009 4:43 pm

Thanks for all the replies. I have been leaning toward the SH, so I will probably go for that first, but I will most likely end up getting one of each (eventually) due to unquenchable GAS. Thanks again.

User avatar
Solderman
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
Posts: 1799
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 5:43 pm

Re: SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by Solderman » Mon May 11, 2009 9:13 pm

Agreed on the slight puzzlement at comparing a monosynth to a polysynth. In terms of pure tone, the 101 tends to get more squelchy and/or plasticy as you increase resonance. The Juno just seems to get more nasal, albeit not so harsh.
The CEM3340 oscillator chip in the SH101 has a unused triangle wave that you can add to the mixer with a modification. This helps to make more resonant sounds fuller-sounding. There's also a simple 101 mod to give you VCA overdrive, which is great for distorted acid sounds. I'm not aware of any mods for the Juno.

The Juno has that great BBD chorus, but if you search for it, the Boss CE-300 will give you a chorus very similar to the one in the JX and Alpha-Juno synths, which is also similar to the earlier Junos and the Jupiter 4.
I am no longer in pursuit of vintage synths. The generally absurd inflation from demand versus practical use and maintenance costs is no longer viable. The internet has suffocated and vanquished yet another wonderful hobby. Too bad.
--Solderman no more.

maindeglorie
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 613
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 3:17 am
Gear: Voyager Select,Little Phatty,ARP Solus,Omni II,Yamaha CS-40M,Prophet 5,Prophet 08,OB-Xa,MaxiKorg,Nord Lead 3,Nord Wave,Eurorack modular, etc.
Location: Pennsylvania (NEPA)

Re: SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by maindeglorie » Tue May 12, 2009 9:15 am

The 101 is cool.... BUT... you can do a lot better for a mono synth.

The Juno 60 is a flat out f**k blast. I know it seems so limited in the specifications, but you will be VERY surprised as to what you can do with those limitations. Nothing beats the Juno 6/60. They are absolutely the best of the Juno's.

User avatar
iProg
Expert Member
Expert Member
Posts: 1019
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 1:28 pm
Real name: Carl
Gear: Prophet-5, Prophet VS, Pro-One, Moog Prodigy, ARP Axxe, Korg PolySix, Roland D-50
Band: ArtWithHeart
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by iProg » Tue May 12, 2009 12:36 pm

maindeglorie wrote:The 101 is cool.... BUT... you can do a lot better for a mono synth.

The Juno 60 is a flat out f**k blast. I know it seems so limited in the specifications, but you will be VERY surprised as to what you can do with those limitations. Nothing beats the Juno 6/60. They are absolutely the best of the Juno's.
Amen.

the Juno is a very versatile polysynth. the arp is great. take it w/ the sequencer!

User avatar
joyfool
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by joyfool » Tue May 12, 2009 4:38 pm

Thanks again for the replies. It was not my intention to compare mon- and polysynths. I was primarily interested in opinions regarding the osc sounds (baseline), and performance of the instruments (live experiences, etc.).

As far as the 101 mod is concerned, I was wondering if a DCB mod was available for the 101 to use the JSQ's (much) larger sequencer note capacity.

Sorry for being unclear.

User avatar
JJQ
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 432
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: Malmo, east-side

Re: SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by JJQ » Tue May 12, 2009 8:54 pm

I cant realy explain why but I prefer the basic sound of the Juno-60, the filter is astounding. And the memory buttons looks tasty. :D

And a bit more power in the low-end to my ears...
Gear: Minimoog, Mother-32, Roland MC-202, TB-303, (Boss) DR-110, TR-505, TR-808, Alpha Juno 2, Jupiter-8, Oberheim SEM, .com/oakley/moon/mos-lab/STG/Sputnik/MegaOhm-modular & Microbrute

User avatar
Solderman
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
Posts: 1799
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 5:43 pm

Re: SH-101 vs. Juno 60/JSQ 60

Post by Solderman » Wed May 13, 2009 2:10 am

joyfool wrote:I was wondering if a DCB mod was available for the 101 to use the JSQ's (much) larger sequencer note capacity.
I looked around and there seems to only be units built for the other way around, CV->DCB, which is the Roland OP-8M.
Since DCB is a multi-buss protocol, it would be more than a mere "mod". Only thing I could think of is a Roland MD-8 DCB<->Midi converter into a standard Midi->CV converter, which obviously is too costly a solution. You'd be better off getting another sequencer that outputs CV/Gate. Agreed the 101 sequencer isn't all that great for improvisation, and certainly lacks mutable tracks or the like.

And just fyi, the Jupiter-8 has a CV/Gate output for highest note played. Assuming you A)Had a JP8, B)Had a Midi->DCB converter or the JSQ, and C)Made sure the master tune and scale tune were calibrated on a 101, you could also use that.
I am no longer in pursuit of vintage synths. The generally absurd inflation from demand versus practical use and maintenance costs is no longer viable. The internet has suffocated and vanquished yet another wonderful hobby. Too bad.
--Solderman no more.

Post Reply