Roland JX-3p

[JDN]

I've owned several analog synths over the years, including the JX-3P. I was just bored and looking at ebay, notice these are very cheap.

I'm curious as to why you think they are so cheap. A 2 oscilator analog synth with a sort of primitve midi and that great roland string sound. Why doesn't this maintain much value compared to like a jupiter 6 or more similarly, a juno 106. I understand why the jupiter is more, but not THAT much more...and I actually prefered the jx-3p to the 106 or 60

[Hossegor]

i had one for some time and i sold it because i didnt like the sound.
to me it sounded cold and thin.

[alexp]

I love my 3P. It has a slightly detuned sound that is very hard to find in other synths. I fell it is basically half of a Jup 6. The chorus on it is lovely, it is capable of being really fat (I have made some fabulous bass patches on it), and the sequencer is really really good (drive it from a cv/gate convertor). It sits in the mix really well, and has the ability for some pretty evolving sounds (which is a surprise considering its such a simple machine).

If I had one niggle, it would be that I dont have the PG200, but to be honest, its not really that bad. It is fairly intuitive, and can make patching a lot of fun.

If you want the early Roland sound without spending upwards of 1500 for a JP6, I would say go for it. You really cant go wrong.


Alex

[Popbott]

As you stated, the JX3P and Juno-106 IMO are more alike compared to the Jupiter synths. The Jupiter series to me is in a different class altogether and have always been more expensive because of the Journey video where Jonathan Cain is playing a Jupiter hanging from a wall. (just kidding!) I think they cost more due to their classic vintage status alone.

The JX3P has a brighter sound than the 106 and is capable of some awesome classic synth sounds. Having the PG200 programmer is way cool for programming, but what most people don't know that you can't use the programmer and MIDI at the same time. On its back panel, there is a switch that lets you choose between using MIDI or the programmer. It sucks because you can't fiddle with the PG200's knobs while it's playing a recorded MIDI sequence when tracking. But it's way fun to program and the PG200 silver knobs and black color look way cool compared to today's standards.

Another downfall of the JX3P is that for MIDI, you can only use it on channel 1. (please correct me if I am mistaken here) Connect MIDI IN to MIDI OUT and power the unit on, it then defaults to MIDI channel 1. KEYBOARD MAGAZINE’s November article on Albert Castillo "The Synth Trickster" got it wrong when Albert said you could or would want do this on the JX-8P. You want to do this on the JX-3P because that is the only way to make it play through MIDI on a single channel. The JX-8P plays on all 16 channels already.

A Juno-106 is way easier to program because of it's on board sliders and a cool feature on the 106 is that you can open/close it's envelope with the pitch bender and record that via MIDI. It also plays on all 16 MIDI channels, which IMO is probably why it is more popular and expensive than the JX3P. The Juno's ultimate downfall is its 80017 chip eventually going bad, in almost all cases. I have never heard of this problem on a JX3P.

To discuss the sonic difference between the JX3P and the Juno-106 is difficult because they can sound so alike. I would have to say the 106 tone is "bassier" OR “fatter”, but not as bright as a JX3P. Then again the JX3P's ability to do a filter saw synth string sounds way better than a 106.

The cost of a JX3P with a PG200 is very close to a Juno-106 according to eBay. The JX3P is a great classic synth for $200, a great buy for it's vintage sound alone.

[chrisso]

Yeah, it might be nice.
I absolutely hated them at the time, but there were other nicer sounding, more flexible synths around.
It could be a great budget analogue synth buy (with hindsight).

[7161]

well they are a dco synth surely? i own the MKS rack version and PG unit and it's great if you dont try and do stuff with it that it's not best for. Good for trance lines etc. You must have the PG tho to make it come alive

[rachel]

A clever person has developed a MIDI expansion for the JX-3P. It's kind of like
a Europa for the 3P (but it's not by Synthcom):

organix' toolshed | projects | JX-3P MIDI Expansion kit


rachel

[Sharp11]

Jeeze, I had one of the first Jx3p's way back in January of 1983 - it was just ok even then, I got rid of it in the late 80's.

It had no touch sensitivity, archaic midi, poor memory functions for storing patches etc.

and it sounds thin......

I suppose its best use would be as a basic educational tool - its front panel layout is very easy and intuitive (even w/o the controller) and the diagrams spell out what;s happening.

But that sound ...... ughhhh

Ed

[Popbott]

Originally Posted by rachel

A clever person has developed a MIDI expansion for the JX-3P. It's kind of like
a Europa for the 3P (but it's not by Synthcom):

organix' toolshed | projects | JX-3P MIDI Expansion kit


rachel

Dang, that is way cool rachell, thanks for the link.

[JDN]

I have to adress a few issues here...first, the jx3p was a true 2 oscilator synth, to me, making it much better and thicker for strings than the juno 106 or 60(I believe that's why the 106's are more known for their squarewave bass sounds). I never found the Jx3p thin.

if you're gonna talk about the midi limitations, surely the jupiter 6 has the same limitation, although again from my first post, it does sound better. And as far as no touch sensitivity, that's everything from that era...moog, roland, korg or anyone from that era...al their synths didn't have touch sensitivity. maybe the juno 106 stands the test of time better for the all important sliders, but i always found the jx3p simple as hell to program

but have the analog fans really digressed this much or forgoten so much that we're comparing the jx3p to the alpha juno1 or 2(which were true digital synths, with almost no analog cirtuitry).

statistics aside, you can't even put the lush strings of the 3p in the same catagory as the juno1, etc...just my opinion.....and back in the day, the roland strings ALWAYS kicked ass over the korgs...

[hautacam]

Could you use a midi controller like the Mackie C4 or the Novation remote Sl to program the JX3P, or can you only use the PG-200?

[hautacam]

Originally Posted by DivineChemical

The JX3P and JX8P can both be programmed using SysEx. The JX10 does require the PG-800.

thanks

[Pro5]

Originally Posted by hautacam

thanks

I know this is an old thread but I spotted this and thought I should correct for others who may look in future.

The JX-3P can NOT be programmed over midi unless you add on an aftermarket MOD (£70 ish). The PG-200 is the only way, no aftermarket controller will do it (ie BCR) due to it's non standard ways.

8P can be programmed over midi very easily (software editor does fine).

Back to the 3P - I've got one (and an 8P) both sound different. The 3P really does have this 'vintage' quality about it (not moog like obviously) but it's great in a mix, it's flawed in a usability way but a fun piece of kit for the price and some of the sounds are worth it alone.

I previously had a Juno 6 and *I* prefer the JX-3P for it's more flexible architecture but it's not as bass heavy (and it's envelopes are not as fast IIRC).

[Derp]

Own and love my JX3P. Got a killer deal on a PG-200, otherwise I wouldn't have bought it. Works fine without it.

[fallforward]

I think it is completely cosmetic. I have both and use them both in my studio. I gig with my 60 however (when an analog is called for) because it LOOKS like a vintage board. It has wood paneling and cool sliders. Though the 60 also can be controlled on board (as opposed to the breakout PG200) so that is my main reason (I SWEAR!)

I would never buy a 106, because of the faulty chips not the sound, and anyone in the market for an analog synth that needs MIDI, the JX3p is the best deal IMO (if the battery has been replaced).

[Popbott]

Originally Posted by fallforward

I would never buy a 106, because of the faulty chips not the sound, and anyone in the market for an analog synth that needs MIDI, the JX3p is the best deal IMO (if the battery has been replaced).

I have a 106 with a bad voice. I went to a friend's house to try his newly repaired 106, and wow, it sounds nice! I guess it's time to take mine in since the opportunity is there. Totally worth it, I just haven't played mine in so long I forgot how great it sounds.

Wow, I can't believe my post from a year ago was so long. (please see above) I still stand by it, love the JX3P, one of the best deals on a synth out there.

[Acid Hazard]

A short video i did a couple years ago with my old JX-3P Kinda makes me want another one...

[SmileOnImpact]

YEah I've had one for years and loved it.
She's a cranky bitch but, that's ok.
at some point i misplaced my pg200. I think it was stolen from my car.
Useless without the synth. So my loss and no one's gain.
shitty :(

[Acid Hazard]

Wow, that's lame. Maybe they had a JX or MKS...?

[Pro5]

or maybe they got £250 on ebay and were glad it was 'useless' to them.. thieving scum (but good taste!)

[Ludwig]

Just sold mine after 3 months of having it, didn't like it...not saying its rubbish because I dont have alot of experience, I just didn't like it...plus it was seriously heavy and I'm moving house soon.

[Pro5]

Originally Posted by Ludwig

Just sold mine after 3 months of having it, didn't like it...not saying its rubbish because I dont have alot of experience, I just didn't like it...plus it was seriously heavy and I'm moving house soon.

JX-3P *HEAVY*? It's very compact and a lightweight compared to stuff like AX80/SY77/Juno60.

And the 3P can do far more than a quick noodling/tweaking of the presets can reveal. A programmer is not essential but IS best as you WILL easily find better sounds using it (I use a BCR with the organix mod). I make sounds with it that my other synths can't touch, it's got a juicy/retro/metallic/gritty/sweet vibe going on, when you bring in some subtle LFO/filter tricks and detune the OSCs a little it fattens up nicely (And that's without even using the famous Roland Chorus which is not needed half as much on the 3P as it is on the Junos, but it's nice to have to make some lead bell sounds ring out in a mix) - completely under-rated and misjudged. If it had sliders as standard, an esoteric 'space based' name and was in a beefier case it would be selling for more than the Junos (software ENVS or not; and 3P's software envs are pretty punchy not like 8P).

I'm kinda glad they haven't really caught on though as I plan to buy another back up and keep it original and mod the hell out of my current one (inc fitting knobs directly in the synth + the new upgrade that turns it into a mini DCO jupiter )

Though I have read more and more articles lately (Sound on Sound etc) about modern artists/producers using the 3P, seems many picked it up cos it was cheap (A no brainer) took time to learn what it could do and realised they couldn't get a nicer synth for even 4 times the cost (in DCO land).

It also sounds NOTHING like 8P/10 (which is pro not a con, as they can compliment each other rather than overlap too much). Also unlike the Juno 6/60 it has way more tonal variations which can lead some quick tweakers into 'thin' 'harsh' or plain 'ugly' sounds and then they write it off as garbage but it's only because it has more room to maneuverer editing wise vs a Juno which are the synths Roland fitted with "training wheels" basically (so you couldn't make it sound bad). The slightly faster envs and deeper bass end will always make J6/60 better for that type of bass, but the 3P (not the 8) makes a great aux/diff kind of bass machine that layers up lovely (with FM etc) and can do way more besides.

I prefer it's sound and possibilities over my polysix / (past) juno 2 and 6 but as always it depends on the kind of music you make and what works for your with other instruments. I've even heard it sounding like a less ballsy Pro One at times (comparing to what i've heard at times from the pro one, and that's saying something for a cheap 2xDCO machine!)

[Mike6581]

It's purely the perceived lack of programmability of the JX-3P minus the PG-200 that hinders the second hand price. Of course you don't really need it to programme sounds but it does make it a bit quicker. I admit it would be nice to be able to control things in real time, such as the filter but it's not a disaster.

For the money it's a bargain, it's got a really unusual cold/metallic sound that the other Rolands of the era don't really bring to the table. The on board sequencer is great fun too.

Well worth a dabble.

[Pro5]

Originally Posted by Mike6581

I admit it would be nice to be able to control things in real time, such as the filter but it's not a disaster.

Before i got the mod / BCR I used to adjust the filter using the edit slider easily enough (I mean while playing/sequencing). It's really just one/two button hit away anyway (group B edit hit patch 1 button) then slider to sweep.

Actually I got smoother sweeps more easily using the on-board slider than the BCR knobs, not sure if that applies to the official PG-200 knobs or just cos of the limits of the midi comms with the mod/bcr combo. Not that you can't do 'smooth' sweeps, it's just the slider seemed physically easier to push up smoothly without overdoing it and 'stepping' I guess.

having all the parameters immediately accessible does allow you to 'warm' to the synth (any synth) more quickly and as the JX is more complicated than the Junos it could have done with it as standard to placate the knob hungry types who tend to hype synths up for their hands on rather than their sound/use in a studio where it doesn't matter quite so much.

[Mike6581]

That's a great idea! Why didn't I think of that before! It's a smashing synth though. One of my faves. I don't own it myself but it's been in the possession of a music co-conspirator of mine for a number of years.

[Pro5]

Originally Posted by Mike6581

That's a great idea! Why didn't I think of that before!

Well, in all fairness, it wasn't MY idea, it was Roland's

[THEODICY]

I just sold my Jx-3p with PG200 and midi mod. I gotta say that I can see/hear why they are inexpensive. There is something not quite there with the sound. This thing is not good for basslines and it overall has this fluffy sound which kinda got boring after a while. It sat above my polysix which would truly blow the Jx out of the water for pure tone. The Jx is a cute synth and it does have a pretty good sync sound but I just couldn't help but always feel like there was something to be desired sonically. I just got a Juno 106 and though the tone of it is pretty inescapable, I feel like the sweet spot is everywhere regardless and it's a much more useful synth for a mix. The bass on the 106 with that filter is REALLY good! I was surprised of how good it is for a polysynth.

[giorgio]

Originally Posted by JDN

if you're gonna talk about the midi limitations, surely the jupiter 6 has the same limitation

the main midi limitation of the jx-3p is that you can't use the pg-200 and midi at the same time. the jupiter 6, if i'm not mistaken, can play notes from midi while you edit it. mine certainly can but it has the europa upgrade so I can't comment on the original for sure.

that said, there is a better magic to the sound of the jupiter 6, but I find the jx-3p very similar (in sound). there are many obvious advantages to the jupiter over the jx-3p otherwise.

[arrowsmith]

I'd put the sound somewhere between a Poly 800 and a Juno 106

thin and limited tonally, that being said I've heard it was used for Terminator

which is pretty awesome, I got rid of it for something more modern.

I had one with PG200 controller, a buddy needed the controller

so I sold it to him, and put the 3P on craigslist

[alexp]

Originally Posted by THEODICY

I just sold my Jx-3p with PG200 and midi mod. I gotta say that I can see/hear why they are inexpensive. There is something not quite there with the sound. This thing is not good for basslines and it overall has this fluffy sound which kinda got boring after a while. It sat above my polysix which would truly blow the Jx out of the water for pure tone. The Jx is a cute synth and it does have a pretty good sync sound but I just couldn't help but always feel like there was something to be desired sonically. I just got a Juno 106 and though the tone of it is pretty inescapable, I feel like the sweet spot is everywhere regardless and it's a much more useful synth for a mix. The bass on the 106 with that filter is REALLY good! I was surprised of how good it is for a polysynth.

This is interesting! I got rid of my 106 and got a 3P and use it for bass a lot. You can get it to sound good, it just takes a bit more fiddling!



alexP