JX-3P VS Polysix

A forum for comparing two or more synths against each other. Also known as "versus" threads.
User avatar
pflosi
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 3620
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 6:14 pm
Gear: more than 150 characters...
Location: zürich
Contact:

Re: JX-3P VS Polysix

Post by pflosi » Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:35 am

Indeed. I personally prefer the Juno 60 over either the JX3P or P6 anyways.

Also, sync is highly underrated. It can do so much more than the classic sweep lead sound. PWM is just one of the tricks :thumbleft:

Cheers!

User avatar
pflosi
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 3620
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 6:14 pm
Gear: more than 150 characters...
Location: zürich
Contact:

Re: JX-3P VS Polysix

Post by pflosi » Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:40 am

Furthermore, it's kinda funny how PWM was a (not so good) replacement for a second osc, while on the other hand you can just as well replace PWM with a second osc :thumbright: :drinks:

commodorejohn
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 1559
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2013 2:39 am
Real name: John
Gear: Roland JX-10/SH-09/MT-32/D-50, Yamaha DX7-II/V50/TX7/TG33/FB-01, Korg MS-20 Mini/ARP Odyssey/DW-8000/X5DR, Ensoniq SQ-80, Oberheim SEM
Location: Sacramento, CA
Contact:

Re: JX-3P VS Polysix

Post by commodorejohn » Wed Dec 31, 2014 3:33 am

Oh yes, oscillator sync is a very, very useful technique. It just isn't a fully satisfactory replacement for proper PWM, is all.
Computers: Amiga 1200, DEC VAXStation 4000/60, DEC MicroPDP-11/73

User avatar
pflosi
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 3620
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 6:14 pm
Gear: more than 150 characters...
Location: zürich
Contact:

Re: JX-3P VS Polysix

Post by pflosi » Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:42 am

Apart from the already mentioned fact that you lose a second osc, where do you see a difference when using sync this way? It's the same as PWM in theory, it sounds the same as PWM, and it looks the same on a scope. Must be PWM...?

commodorejohn
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 1559
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2013 2:39 am
Real name: John
Gear: Roland JX-10/SH-09/MT-32/D-50, Yamaha DX7-II/V50/TX7/TG33/FB-01, Korg MS-20 Mini/ARP Odyssey/DW-8000/X5DR, Ensoniq SQ-80, Oberheim SEM
Location: Sacramento, CA
Contact:

Re: JX-3P VS Polysix

Post by commodorejohn » Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:41 pm

Well, again, losing an oscillator is not nothing. But basically I say this because I've never managed to get it to sound quite the way I expect PWM to sound, no matter how carefully I calibrate it to not go outside into full-fledged sync tones.
Computers: Amiga 1200, DEC VAXStation 4000/60, DEC MicroPDP-11/73

db0451
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 12:06 am

Re: JX-3P VS Polysix

Post by db0451 » Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:52 pm

What is an example of a synth that typifies your expectation of PWM, and how does this differ from that produced by the JX-3P?

commodorejohn
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 1559
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2013 2:39 am
Real name: John
Gear: Roland JX-10/SH-09/MT-32/D-50, Yamaha DX7-II/V50/TX7/TG33/FB-01, Korg MS-20 Mini/ARP Odyssey/DW-8000/X5DR, Ensoniq SQ-80, Oberheim SEM
Location: Sacramento, CA
Contact:

Re: JX-3P VS Polysix

Post by commodorejohn » Wed Dec 31, 2014 6:58 pm

I can't speak for the JX-3P as I've never used it, but on my JX-10 and my SQ-80 both, I've attempted that trick, and in neither case has it sounded right, even with careful calibration on my part so that it doesn't modulate past the point where it would have more than one cycle on the slave oscillator per cycle on the master. Any synth with real PWM (the Prophet 600 I owned, the Minibrute, h**l, even manually twiddling the knob on my MS-20 Mini) better "typifies my expectation" than that.
Computers: Amiga 1200, DEC VAXStation 4000/60, DEC MicroPDP-11/73

User avatar
pflosi
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 3620
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 6:14 pm
Gear: more than 150 characters...
Location: zürich
Contact:

Re: JX-3P VS Polysix

Post by pflosi » Wed Dec 31, 2014 7:08 pm

I must confess I never actually tried this on the JX (don't have one myself, but played it lots of times), but on the A6 I can dial it in perfectly. An oscilloscope certainly helps, as you have to prevent the square wave from "folding" over (thus keeping the LFO modulation attenuated enough). Which happens when the slave osc is either an octave above or two octaves below the master osc, if my thinking is right. Thus, you get the "best" results (i.e., widest range) when the slave is tuned down 6 or 7 semitones. No idea what the JX manual says, all IME so YMMV and all that :thumbright:

Post Reply