so Juno 60's are about £1000 now? what the h**l?!

[jxalex]

No, I dont see it. Make a better example. It is very off.

Also I do not have to spend money on women, becouse the women themself buy gifts to me instead and try to get my attention. Women are not so important to spend money on them, or in other words -- they have no value in a monetary way.

You won't see it. I'm not sure why Colman is still able to post here, but it's generally an accepted practice to completely ignore him. I suggest you do likewise. Just browse through his post history on VSE and it will be apparent why. He's trying to keep the sexual weirdness of the thread going, so don't feed the troll. No one (else) wants to know the details about who's spending what within their interpersonal relationships, lasting or casual.

Yes I understood that troll part.
But so far so good. I think the speech freedom is a Good Thing. Quite much moderated forum will be turned to snakenest if the admins are corrupted... or will do nothing at all (All what evil needs in order to prosper is just this --- good people to do nothing. I believe that when just saying out loud everything out then it solves the problem itself, and does not escalate.

I am really bad with people myself and being misunderstood easily and I misunderstood easy way (in exception if the another is with Asperger syndrome, then interesting is that I understand very well).

... I hope everyone is here welcome who has 10+ keyboards or synth modules and have been with G.A.S.



Still.... just idea... here is a place where are quite many electronic skilled people.
People have developed opensoftware and why not also make together the synth schematics. The thing is that it does not need so much tools than actually brainpower to make ready schematics, PCB layout etc. We do not need to go back lead details, but 0806 and 0603 size SMD details would be good enough (reflow owen), as these PCBs really are _faster_ to build together than its lead counterparts. Still how many have vision or tools to handle such details when we are already prototyping and making research?
Its too early to talk about mass production, but I think that it is good enough if just step by step the first long-term milestone is that we have ready the schematics, layouts and descriptions in order that everyone who wants to build can actually build his polysynth ready. Compared to $2500 price there is enough room for a soldering iron, $400 oscilloscope and some details, and still more than 1000USD will be left over, but everyone gets sharp soldering skills.
I am in Sweden. There are also some in U.S., one who makes multibank cards I noticed is in Germany ... it makes me to think that in every gearhead neighbourhood there is atleast one tech with PCB making lab. But instead of making all this work 10 times over individually we can make it faster if just dividing it.

OK, now I got thread derailed again... but I really get idea that there could be idea to make the Juno replicas for CHEAP and SIMPLE way, and which can be made ready in a affordable time (couple weeks if every evening 1..2 hours to make it for someone even with a novice-intermediate skill?) -- once the schematics are ready so that everyone can do it! Then everyone will do it and this concept and clones will spread itself like a software which is copied.
Xoxbox is quite a TB303 alike clone, and there is a schematic about it AND manual how to build it. I have built together 2 of these, and readed through that user guide I see no reason why other would not be capable of making 6..12 voice polysynth modules. Most software suck becouse they do not do proper offline-read ready manual and they point to wwwwwwwww adress instead where these help instructions are forever-beta.
Willem programmer clones is the whole e-bay full! and being cheaper and cheaper. The same can be also with polysynth modules, and then we have everyone these affordable synthesizers which are in cult status right now... TB303 clone we have already at the market as XOXBOX... but about holy grail Juno-106... just
no-one has done it before I guess? There are instead 1-2 dudes who make a synth as his life work and put a price sticker on it and starve behind it and goes into grave with that creative result... instead to share it, to let it multiply and prosper.
At 2006 I got idea to make my own 24-voice multitimbral VCO based synth, but I gave up that project (I found a one modular synth site where all was based on lead details and I thought to miniaturize it with SMD details, also back then I could not figure out how to make a firmware for controlling it, neither I had any proper schematic CAD tools back then for such a complicated work). when I thought that it takes more than 3..4 months to make it together, while ROland MKS-80+MPG80 rack cost was back then 1500USD (and these were forever re-listed prices on e-bay when I bought it).
But... now it could be some simpler methods to make 6 voice polysynth I think... at first in 19" 2U format and in a 2-sided PCB with 0806 SMD components, as it saves enorm amount time.

What do other fellows think about it?
Or how many get now wet dreams about it? --- after some years having 8..12 voice VCO synths which are custom, in a rack format and better advanced clones than Roland MKS80 was actually. And these boards will be manufactured from one point on in e-bay by these chinese salespersons and they try to be cheaper than others, instead to compete with others... and... at the end we get all work from them and complete synths building from blocks -- power supply, cpu-assigner-board, voice boards, There is certainly a thought if it is more affordable than PAiA.

[jxalex]

and no, I have not taken anything which makes me high. No troubles. Some thoughts and high dreams. But I sincerely believe that 10 heads together in a one year can do as much as everyone alone in the next 10 years depending on skill, possibilities and ressources if just dividing the tasks which can be done in parallel which are needing brainpower.

[Solderman]

I don't really have much more to add regarding putting heads together and starting a business to design and build synthesizers, as it's all just too much to get my head around. But it made me think of the recent endeavor by a single individual to design and build the Futuresonus Parva. I realize this is a DCO poly, and that it has a long and sordid history of design flaws, firmware bugs and disappointed customers. But I guess the point is this kind of thing while possible, will take more than a modest effort to produce something everyone can find a use for and some satisfaction with.

Dreaming of a new and authentic Juno 60 or Juno 106, when Roland expects Malekko to design and build the System 500 for the lucrative modular synth market, and appears to be using AIRA for everything else, is probably asking for too much. I will continue to watch the analogue synth market and maybe even buy a few more, if that means doing my part to encourage an increased market share and it's a product I can use and enjoy.

[madtheory]

The Behringer Deep Mind 12 is a Juno inspired poly developed by the Midas team in the UK... and Behringer are hiring worldwide because they see a market for more of that...

[ppg_wavecomputer]

This is getting a bit weird here.

Did you take your pills, and if so, where do I get these as well?

Stephen

synthesizers
music,
and some topics here which tend to be my favourites (about synthesizers and electronics) which
I admire. Perhaps thats how this site influences if just taking time to read and answer for couple hours.

So go ahead.

"Look, Dave. I can see you are really upset about this. I honestly think you want to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over." (HAL 9000)

Stephen

[jxalex]

The Behringer Deep Mind 12 is a Juno inspired poly developed by the Midas team in the UK... and Behringer are hiring worldwide because they see a market for more of that...

There are many many products I like Behringer makes, still about this synthesizer...
yes, just something like that, however just now I see just one weak spot -- the support software. I dont know what it supports, so better it should be nothing, becouse that operating system support is only for next-to-latest operating systems. Thats really sick! It really does NOT make sense in any way!

After couple years there are problems to get work that software, while Behringer synth is still usable.
We know how short is the software lifecycle and their problems with compatibility! But 20 years for a hardware synth is nothing (and you can still get it and use it), whereas for software...? This synth has added support for all latest items from Wifi to Android and with Win7, which makes me wonder that how come that they keep the MIDI connectors which seems the only retro besides DCO architecture.
That software should be atleast open and backward compatible to much earlier OS (down to Atari and WIN98 for example?) Well, perhaps if some architect notices my critique or post here, then he may seem insulted, but to me is insulting to have support which requires a far too new computer. Without MIDI I guess it wont have a chance.

Hallo, it seems like it is released for "average computer users", however we are not keen to swap and upgrade systems with such frequency.

If the operating system support is for atleast billgates prelatest trend, then I can as throw away the support disc.

Also we dont know how many work on that item, it does has everything, but most important thing what we find out soon is the MIDI timing and stability.

However I planned something simpler still where it is just like that: voice boards, assigner board and power supply, however all these beyond that is matter of taste and up to everyone elses taste to contribute if they want to add Wifi.
and if built it will be more easily affordable as it is more about components and most time it takes research and development for schematics and just release the schematics for FREE. Thats the whole point and makes synths affordable, becouse it also creates competing market in that case of those who build for more than for themself.
Also with this model putting heads together it can result with more contributors and better quality in schematics as it is more including, not excluding the development process.

When Behringer releases that synth then I suspect there wont be any schematics released, huh? And so if there IS something wrong it still is closed architecture and you are living from the manufacturers mercy. So no possibility to fix or maintain, upgrade etc yourself without really reverse engineering and cracking the work done? Thats what
annoys me mostly with these things -- if something is not as it should, or just wanting to add on something, then there is at first forbidden-to-reverse-engineer terms, both about software and even in hardware (in some cases).
MANY good programs have died out becouse of this -- there ARE many who want to develop on, but manufacturer says NO! I wonder how else it happened that there come to market JX10 upgrades --- through hard work, reverse engineering and "copyright breach"
well I hope not to panicattack at first.
Still, I should read that gearslutz thread in that case at first through.

[colmon]

You won't see it. I'm not sure why Colman is still able to post here, but it's generally an accepted practice to completely ignore him. I suggest you do likewise.

Wow. You have a lot of hate in your heart.

[jxalex]

make love not war.

[jxalex]

I don't really have much more to add regarding putting heads together and starting a business to design and build synthesizers, as it's all just too much to get my head around. But it made me think of the recent endeavor by a single individual to design and build the Futuresonus Parva. I realize this is a DCO poly, and that it has a long and sordid history of design flaws, firmware bugs and disappointed customers. But I guess the point is this kind of thing while possible, will take more than a modest effort to produce something everyone can find a use for and some satisfaction with.

Dont get me wrong! My idea was that the development would be in a open architecture without making a business or some trade from it. It would be that those who will just give their time of free choice and brainpower to develop in a voluntary basis, in a free rhytm -- we sure have a hobbys, dont we? And we do not have to convert anything for money. Also it can be much more fun if it is in a distributed development way as a hobby... Thats how linux was born. Why not also electronics schematics?
And also these schematics would be free and available for public with terms that these can be used as long as the updates and development will be shared publicly too, whatever if it is even for different synth version evolved already.
So it would be including everyone who want and they can take further from where I stop and or take other sights. Just having it as someones trade would be very limiting in both quality and availability.

I see nowhere the schematics of Parva synthesizer, neither I see about Behringer synth schematics. If there
are flaws, the project will die, the authors leave it, no-one can improve it as author refuses.
Many projects have died becouse of the author lost interest and concealment. He takes his source and schematics to the grave as a trade secret whatever how buggy or bad the design is and whatever how many want to improve it!
JUst becouse of this kind of situations I quit working for software companies and hate them becouse they waste and trash creative ressources.
There are many examples where men want to develop on some certain project, but they just dont get a chance other than just beginning over from the scratch while it would be better to develop the existing project.

AS LONG as there are individual synth makers who make and put a price sticker on it but make a secrecy about schematics, then the quality will not improve about the end product and all will be repeated over and over again as the next one will do it from the scratch again.

Just think how linux have evolved throughout the decades. Every line of the source code is available for public, there are also contributors, and they do it from free time, give away for free!
I think that certainly after some time when all is ready there will be some new ones who will contribute with schematics and complete PCB layouts etc. which improve the functionality and/or firmware upgrades.

Also, just lets keep it simple in the beginning. No need for Wifi, microwave oven and toaster.

I will do it just becouse it seems very interesting, even if I have 2 Juno-106 synths, ROland Super Jupiter and Prophet 600.
But anyway, if I will start, then I hope that there will be atleast some contributions later and ideas how to improve and there are almost/certainly situations where I need help myself too. Open for everyone.

I think that just if making another thread and at first everyone postes his search results about schematics of VCO and there are then continued choice and improvement about how and what to make, in some time it will catch up about making schematics.
I somehow think that it CANt be so expensive that it will cost $1000 to make a polysynth with VCOs, it can be less than half from that cost for developer if keeping polyphony quite "sensible".

[Bitexion]

Holy s**t this thread went off-topic fast.

[meatballfulton]

they have not become more expensive to maintain in last 10 years

Of course they have become more expensive...fewer spare parts are available for repairs, fewer techs who can work on them.

There's lots of parts for 80s era synths that are only available by cannibalizing another (hopefully busted) synth.

Heck, I had a Korg Electribe (made between 1999-2002) that had a busted custom-made pot and Korg no longer could supply that part less than ten years later.

[jxalex]

they have not become more expensive to maintain in last 10 years

Of course they have become more expensive...fewer spare parts are available for repairs, fewer techs who can work on them.

There's lots of parts for 80s era synths that are only available by cannibalizing another (hopefully busted) synth.

Heck, I had a Korg Electribe (made between 1999-2002) that had a busted custom-made pot and Korg no longer could supply that part less than ten years later.

My another Juno looks like original, but there are no stock faders inside. I just used what I had and some PCB modifying did the trick.
Some parts can be replaced,
Some parts can be manufactured yourself.
Some methods can be researched (just like dissolving the juno VCF chip solves the "dead voice" problem).


that "my neighbour knew, but he is dead by now"... or what?

Problem is actually that there are many many people who are proud of their stupidity. Instead of just learning some new skills they are bragging that they do not know even which end is hot on a soldering iron.

I do not understand why people are not self-learners to become techs as well when having such a huge amount synths and they do not play on them anyway...? THey are very very interested about synths... so... ? Just idea.
I assume they certainly have quite much time to learn electronics while watching TV with just one ear...

[jxalex]

Holy s**t this thread went off-topic fast.

Atleast talking about synthesizers... still.

does it takes 10+ pages before it happens while talking about Roland synths?

I hope something good will come out from it.

[meatballfulton]

I do not understand why people are not self-learners to become techs

Some people just want to make music, not become electronics technicians. Is that really so hard to understand?

[jxalex]

I do not understand why people are not self-learners to become techs

Some people just want to make music, not become electronics technicians. Is that really so hard to understand?

I meant about synthesizer collectors. Becouse really, these who have many vintage synths, do not make music with them. Or not so much...

However THIS part -- music making -- I understand, however so far who make music with vintage synthesizers are rare - special case among the ones which I have got in contact.