juno 60 vs jx3p vs polysix.

[aquablue]

Hi,

inspired by fantastic jp-8 demos, I'm now looking for some watery liquid sounds -- splashy dripping basslines, arps, etc.... I've been advised on gearslutz that these three are good for that due to the juno and jx-3p having the liquidy roland jp-8 filter and the polysix having the SSM filter which is supposed to be even more watery. However, what do you think is the best for what I want? I can't justify getting the JP-8 just for this, and its too much money for me for a 30 year old synth. However, if i can get something similar in the liquidy fluidy department for much less, i would be happy.

Cheers
Aq

[diezdiazgiant]

if i were you i would just buy a jx3p on account of it being cheapest,
try it out for a bit. if you dont like it - sell it and buy another synth.

[fastfwdd]

The SSM chips in the polysix do lend it a very smooth, watery feel and sound. More so than my 106 I would say. The SSM filters combined with the onboard effects give the synth an incredible sound; I would say go for it.

[carbon111]

Before this gets moved to Buyer's Guide, I'd like to chime in on the side of the Juno 60: http://www.carbon111.com/juno60.html

I used it a ton on Shadow, including the arpeggiated tone on "Arrival": http://carbon111.com/music/arrival.mp3

[Z]

I plan to make a comparison video for my YouTube Channel between the Juno 60 & PolySix. Any specific and/or technical differences would be appreciated (other than the obvious stuff) or any certain areas that you would like me to touch on or emphasize in the video, let me know.

[Automatic Gainsay]

I'd just like to remind the poster and everyone else that the JX3P may be the cheapest and have the ugliest interface, but it DOES have TWO OSCILLATORS, greater functionality, and a delightfully vintage sound.

[ross308]

if you can get the jx-3p with the pg-200 programmer you're in for a lot of fun . personally i believe that with the programmer, the interface is quite lovely. i like the shiny knobs and their feel . this one can get really funky also. i recommend it . it can also do great "not at all watery" sounds

the juno's sound sweet

the polysix . i would love to have one . i only tried a software simulation but i dig the clean basse's and the saw stab's.
it holds VCO's while the two others have DCO'S

they are all good synth'S!

you can easily get demo's of those 3 on you tube . listen to your ears !

[JJQ]

Al three of them are great, and the JUno-60 sounds close to the JP-8 in basic sounds.
Ive had three Junos and two JX-3p over the years.

Check the audio demo of the juno-60 filter on bluesynths.

[HideawayStudio]

Yikes... this is a more difficult one...

If it were a JX3P and a PG200 then the JX would be in the same league as the other two - it's a lovely warm sounding synth albeit a bit toylike/ugly to look at. I've made some really nice warm samples using JX-3P in the past.

The Juno 60 is also a really nice synth. The control surface makes it really fun to use. It's warmer than Juno-106 but without midi and any midi retrofit is never going to be as good as 106's midi. That said, it will be more valuable than 3P with time.

I must confess I've never owned a Polysix (I always wanted a MonoPoly), although I've heard many demos. I own a DW-8000 which I really like and have always been a Korg fan. The Polysix was often pitched against the Juno 6/60 and is likely to be the most valuable/sought after out of the three in the long run. It's too old for midi but there's plenty of decent CV-midi convertors out there.

If I had to chose between the three(although there would be much sucking through teeth), considering I already have a load of analog gear, I'd go for the Polysix as in some ways it's the most interesting option.

[Automatic Gainsay]

I am an obsessive knob-per-function fellow... and although I have had two JX3Ps with PG-200s, my current JX3P does not have one. I hate digital interfaces on analog synths, but there is something dopey and fun about the JX3P interface even WITHOUT the PG-200.
Even with the shitty but silly-fun interface, the JX blows away all non-two-osc DCO 80s polysynths.
I've never had a Polysix, but from what I've heard, the VCOs are nice. You've got to ask yourself, though... is that nice sound going to trump functionality for you?
:::shrugs:::

[Joey]

the polysix is one of the best sounding synths i have ever used

[Sir Ruff]

Between the poly-6 and juno60, the p6 definitely wins for functionality-3 lfos (VCO/VCF/VCA, PWM and chorus) instead of 1.. Tho it lacks any option for external sequencing and all waveforms at once.
In terms of sound, they really are different. P6 has a much more brassy analog sound than the 60... Bass is good, but it does not sound as good in the high end. juno 60 wins for pad and string sounds definitely. High end is much clearer. The poly6's envelopes are fine, but not as tight and precise as the juno... The p6 has more "effect" modes, but realistically, they are pretty similar, and fairly muddy compared to the j60 chorus... the p6 just has a muddier analog sound in general. No stereo out on the p6.
so I would decide which of those two you like the sound of better, and THEN compare that to the jx3p... personally I would probably go for the jx over all of them, just because of the wider range of sounds... It could sound like a juno, whereas the juno will not sound like it.

[Pro5]

Well Korg keybeds/key action have usually left me a bit disappointed... but that aside I'd love a poly-six. I think they look smart, love the layout of the knobs and sound great. Watch out for the leaky battery problem (frying the circuit board) if you buy one - CHECK THIS PROPERLY BEFORE PAYING!

Had a Juno6 (same sound as 60) and of course it has 'the sound'. I have to admit, I do prefer my JX-3p to the Juno 6 I had (though I wish the 3p had an ARP just for a bit of fun now n then, also solo/unison/portamento would have been nice).

A lot of these battles come down to 'what kind of music/use' are they going to be for? Some hardcore dance/techno head guys would prefer the Juno over the others (I think).. I'm sure it's envelopes are faster than the 3P. And it's bass end is no doubt better.

The 3P however is more flexible with it's 2 (DCOs) and X-mod etc... also has some toys on board (Step sequencer good for little idea tryouts), and personally I really love the way it looks - because it IS different.. it's so strange that it looks cool 25 years later!

I don't have a pg-200 due to silly prices being asked but would love one I know it would turn the synth into a crazy hands on funk-master. I don't use it (much) for filter swept dance riffs so it's not too bad without the programmer anyway.

And one thing that is cool (compared to my JX-8P) is that you just hit bank a/b for editing then a single button - so bank b/switch 1 and you have your Cutof frequencey on the edit slider - switch 4 - resonance. on the 8P you have to type in a 2 digit parameter number (52 and 53 for ref) after hitting the paramter key. So in this way the 3P only 'really' needs the programmer if you want to tweak live - cutoff and resonance together at the same time - otherwise it's perfectly easy to program from the panel.

Got into a bit too much detail there but... ok honesty time.. for the PRICE I'd definitely go for the JX-3P.

Money no object, probably the Polysix. And if I needed the specific sounds of the Juno then that of course.

In other words it's your choice as they are all good synths. The 3P is made BETTER by the fact it is cheaper generally (and easier to find for sale) so I'd start with that and as someone said above.. if you don't like it sell it on and get one of the other 2.

edit > btw I've a couple of patches on my JX-3P (self programmed) that sound VERY close to certain Jupiter 8 sounds and it does seem more flexible than my Juno 6 was and suits my music more at this time.

[mute]

i've owned all 3 and the only one i still own is my jx-3p/pg-200 (and the rackmount version, the mks-30 which actually has different filters re: the juno 106). glad to see ppl have finally wised up to the thing, its a great synth. dunno why some of you think it's ugly though, i love its looks (though, without the pg200 i would probably have a different feeling) for awhile i was really tempted to do a silkscreen for it with the red-orange/black style from a jupiter.

if you've got the nads, there is a really-really sexy and simple mod you can order for the jx-3p that makes it much more of a beast and gives it some modern features (like full midi params in&out, software editor, simultaneous use of the sequencer + controlbox + midi, etc.).

[Envergure]

In the "liquid" department, I'd go for the JX-3P on account of its having 2 oscs per voice. It lends itself better to fluid pads and keys than a single-oscillator synth.

The JX-3P and JUNO-60 have the same filter unit FYI (Roland IR3109).

Although, one thing to consider is that the JUNO has a 6-voice unison mode for huge pads if you're willing to take the time to record each note in a chord individually. By plugging the JX-3P's MIDI-out into its MIDI-in you can create 2-voice unison, and detune them by pushing the pitchbender a bit off-centre.