Unimpressed with the JX3P

[Ludwig]

So I've had my Roland JX-3P for about a month now and I can honestly say I havn't found any sounds I like. Sure, it does have that analogue warmth that everyone goes on about, but to me the sounds are dated and pretty unusable for the contemporary dance music I want to create. I'm thinking of selling it and buying a Blofeld or something unless someone can point me in the direction of something I might be missing on the JX-3P?

[d1rtynyc]

To each his own I guess.
I love the gritty basses & leads you can get out of it. The pads & washed are very 80's IMO which is cool too.
For me it has it's place, but for some looking for that sleek ultra "modern" digitized sound I can see why the might not like it. (not saying that is you).
Maybe that may be why they are easy to find for pretty cheap, but I like em'. I like grit.

[sctt_stone]

Hey- I got my JX-3P a week or so after you did.

So I have had it for three weeks and I feel you.

Its hard for me to like.

The one thing I have found That I do like is punchy staccato Knight Rider bass.

It seems to exel at this task.

In fairness I think I will like it better with a Programmer for it.

And the sequencer is cool.

I did howevr just buy a JUno 106 and it is bad ass! I love it.

[SWAN808]

I agree I found it quite fun to use for a bit but ultimately pretty weak metallic Oscillators and digital envelopes at least somewhat brought to life by the roland chorus. Definitely I would not recommend it for contemporary dance music!

If I had lots of space and money I might have kept it around for its cool 80s vibe and styling. Some nice pads and bell sounds. But not the cream of the analogue crop for sure. Just a fun way of getting onto the Analogue property ladder. Its charming in a slightly crap way.

PS if you are making dance music I would really look into this product out soon: FXpansion Synth Squad

TBH real analogue only suits certain types of dance music IMO - actually virtual analogue (software or hardware) is more appropriate much of the time. I dont know what your specifically going for tho...

[Popbott]

Any synth like the JX3P is FULL of dance music sounds, it just needs programming. No one said you could instantly pick up the JX3P and start making dance music. Like anything in music, it takes work. If all I had was a JX3P and someone paid me and said, " do a contemporary dance song using this one synth" I could confidently guarantee a cool dance track.

Perhaps what you are missing are all the bells and whistles that come with dance music. Sounds like a lot of stereo delay, chorus/flange effects and lots of reverb. Once you add these effects to the JX, it really comes to life. Take my Virus TI for example, remove the effects section, arpeggiator effects and animated LFO's and and you pretty much have all the same basic classic waveforms you could get from a JX. Sampling the JX into a multi-timbral sampler also gives this beast new life. I recommend you listen a little closer to the kind of music you want to do, buy some outboard effects and start digging a little more into the JX, it's all in there. Don't give up!

[sctt_stone]

Exactly why it bugs me.

Lack of instant gratification.

With the P5 and Juno 106 its all instant gratification.

But seriously the Juno is blowing my mind.


Its every thing the P5 is not, In a good way.

Originally Posted by Popbott

Any synth like the JX3P is FULL of dance music sounds, it just needs programming. No one said you could instantly pick up the JX3P and start making dance music. Like anything in music, it takes work. If all I had was a JX3P and someone paid me and said, " do a contemporary dance song using this one synth" I could confidently guarantee a cool dance track.

Perhaps what you are missing are all the bells and whistles that come with dance music. Sounds like a lot of stereo delay, chorus/flange effects and lots of reverb. Once you add these effects to the JX, it really comes to life. Take my Virus TI for example, remove the effects section, arpeggiator effects and animated LFO's and and you pretty much have all the same basic classic waveforms you could get from a JX. Sampling the JX into a multi-timbral sampler also gives this beast new life. I recommend you listen a little closer to the kind of music you want to do, buy some outboard effects and start digging a little more into the JX, it's all in there. Don't give up!

[sctt_stone]

Exactly why it bugs me.

Lack of instant gratification.

With the P5 and Juno 106 its all instant gratification.

But seriously the Juno is blowing my mind.


Its every thing the P5 is not,...In a good way.

Originally Posted by Popbott

Any synth like the JX3P is FULL of dance music sounds, it just needs programming. No one said you could instantly pick up the JX3P and start making dance music. Like anything in music, it takes work. If all I had was a JX3P and someone paid me and said, " do a contemporary dance song using this one synth" I could confidently guarantee a cool dance track.

Perhaps what you are missing are all the bells and whistles that come with dance music. Sounds like a lot of stereo delay, chorus/flange effects and lots of reverb. Once you add these effects to the JX, it really comes to life. Take my Virus TI for example, remove the effects section, arpeggiator effects and animated LFO's and and you pretty much have all the same basic classic waveforms you could get from a JX. Sampling the JX into a multi-timbral sampler also gives this beast new life. I recommend you listen a little closer to the kind of music you want to do, buy some outboard effects and start digging a little more into the JX, it's all in there. Don't give up!

[Black-Man]

Uhhh... you *really* need the programmer.

The folks who say you can effectively program it w/ the data slider are either liars or have way too much time on their hands.

[Popbott]

Originally Posted by Black-Man

Uhhh... you *really* need the programmer.

The folks who say you can effectively program it w/ the data slider are either liars or have way too much time on their hands.

I have a programmer. But if I didn't, (like on my JX8P) programming with the slider controls is not that difficult if you have a basic knowledge of programming synths. Geez, makes it sound like it's as hard as programming FM on a DX-7, it's not. It's a very simple layout.

[alexp]

Originally Posted by Black-Man

Uhhh... you *really* need the programmer.

The folks who say you can effectively program it w/ the data slider are either liars or have way too much time on their hands.

LMAO!!


This is the funniest post on GS today.

K let me edit this... I dont want to come across as THAT much of a dick....

I think the JX3P is laid out in a very organized manner minus the PG200. It makes it so no parameter is more than a button push away. If you follow the schematic on the right side of the panel, your good. The PG200, while a convenience, is really not needed, unless your into the whole instant gratification thing. If thats the case, you should be playing drums... The PG has some major disadvantages. Not being able to tweak the thing real time when its being triggered by midi is pretty major in my mind. I like to build up a sound to suit a riff, not the other way around. Plus the 200's are worth more than the actual synth itself which is a bit silly.... I dunno, call me a glutton for punishment (says the guy with the Mirage) but I really dont think its needed to get great sounds out of it.



alexP

[nofi]

I had the mks-30 for a few years, and I never really got into it either.

weird - cause there's people in this forum who love it that I have a lot of gear taste in common with, but the jx3p/mks30 - it's really not for me.


I think you guys with the new jx3ps should sit on the synth for a few months, and have a play with it every few weeks (sometimes it can take a while to click with new gear) One month is not enough time to really evaluate something, but if you still don't click with it after a few months, sell it on and get something else...

[YetiHunter]

If he/she doesn't like it. He/She doesn't like it. I've seen the JX-3p get a lot of use from someone, works great for them. But THEY are a unique person, like everyone else.

[Don Solaris]

Originally Posted by Ludwig

So I've had my Roland JX-3P for about a month now and I can honestly say I havn't found any sounds I like. Sure, it does have that analogue warmth that everyone goes on about, but to me the sounds are dated and pretty unusable for the contemporary dance music I want to create.

I think it's better you get yourself a GM synth module with 1500 presets, and sell this synth to someone who will actually use it.

[dlmorley]

The JX3p is just an oddball synth with a cool sound if you don't want that classic juno synth sound. It is metallic and can be harsh and bright and tight. All in a good way. But, it isn't for everyone.
It doesn't have the classic Roland sound (in fact I don't think they designed it) but it's a unique thing.
Sell it. Move on.
I had the MKS30 and really liked it. Sold it as I needed the money, but haven't felt the urge to replace it.

[Mans]

I've never owned a jx3p (did own the 8p) so I really can't comment on the sound but what I do notice in general on this forum is the way synths gets judged on the sounds it comes with. Seems very few people here are actually profound at programming synths. Which to me is what a synth is all about and what it should be judged on. If you want instant gratification why not buy the latest 'hot' sample library?

[dlmorley]

I didn't see anyone mention the presets myself.
The jx3p is a bit deeper than it might appear at first, but it isn't the hardest to program. It is a synth with a unique sound however and if you don't like it's basic sound, no amount of "expert" programming will change that.

[Justynfromnz]

A friend and I who share our synth costs have A jx-3p,mks-30 and a gr-707/700 and one pg-200 (between all of them). Rocking the pg200 with the mks is pretty cool, but its really not that much of a pain to edit the jx ... unless you wanna tweak 2 knobs at once maybe?

It definitely sounds "thinner" than some of the other analog polys we have ( 106's , mks 80 , monopoly, matrix etc) but i really believe there is a place for it sonically with what we do. It does sound cool, and you wouldn't want HUGE synth sounds on every part of a song. Well i don't anyway. So there are times (quite a few) where A jupiter 6 or juno sound will get swapped out for the jx-3p, so that it better fits the context of the song.

For example , maybe the jx3p is a perfect bass machine if you have a song with a giant kick...
As with most things musical, I believe it comes down to Relationships and context. Solo is your enemy.

[Black-Man]

Originally Posted by alexp

LMAO!!
The PG200, while a convenience, is really not needed, unless your into the whole instant gratification thing.
alexP

Again... you have *way* too much time on your hands. In the time it takes to edit 1 parameter using the slider, I can edit 4-5 parameters on the PG-200. And who cares if MIDI isn't available while you edit? Some of us can actually *play* our instruments.

[dietrich10]

I had the MKS30 a long time ago. I used one low bass patch on it and sometimes slightly tweaked. sold it to a buddy and he did the same thing.
It was great for that but I always had better options for interesting sounds than the mks30. I dont remember the filter being steep enough for percussive sounds...but i am not 100%

[SWAN808]

the PG200 it handy for learning the synths sound and architecture - but I and others found that once you have used it for a while and know the controls - its pretty easy to program without the programmer....some sell on their PG200 once they have got to this point and keep the JX3p. You can get decent coin out of a PG sale.

[Don Solaris]

Originally Posted by dlmorley

It doesn't have the classic Roland sound

Oh, yes sir it does! thumbsup Evidence submitted: JP-8 and then JX-3P - check out the sweep sound. Very similar character. No wonder, it shares the same IR3109 filter chip and BA662 VCAs from Juno 60 and Jupiter 8. More/less, JX-3P is a two DCO Juno 60 without hardware envelopes and a little bit less power in self osc (but that can be restored with a modification).

[Mike6581]

It's a great little synth, but like the other JXs it needs a bit of care to caress the best sounds out of it. It's not like a Juno or Jupiter 4/6 where you've got that instant, no-nonsenseness but they're still great synthesizers. I'd much rather have it than ANY virtual analogue synth out there, I think they sound great (with or without PG-200). Don't forget that every vintage synth has it's own strengths and weaknesses particular style(s) of sound it specialises in. I also think every synth has it's sweet spots in it's settings where it really comes to life, so it's just a matter of finding them.

Don't give up on it just yet, that's all I can say!

[dlmorley]

Originally Posted by Don Solaris

Oh, yes sir it does! thumbsup Evidence submitted: JP-8 and then JX-3P - check out the sweep sound. Very similar character. No wonder, it shares the same IR3109 filter chip and BA662 VCAs from Juno 60 and Jupiter 8. More/less, JX-3P is a two DCO Juno 60 without hardware envelopes and a little bit less power in self osc (but that can be restored with a modification).

I disagree.
I like the sound but to me it is TOTALLY different to a Juno 60 (and I had them beside each other for maybe 10 years)
But that may just be me! The JX3p is unique amongst Rolands I think.
As for what chips, you must know as well as me that different designs can sound totally different despite using the same chips..

ps: I must admit to not being a big Jupiter 8 fan (not saying it's bad, but not my thing), so it would be unfair for me to compare a JX3p with a JP8

[Popbott]

Originally Posted by Black-Man

Again... you have *way* too much time on your hands. In the time it takes to edit 1 parameter using the slider, I can edit 4-5 parameters on the PG-200. And who cares if MIDI isn't available while you edit? Some of us can actually *play* our instruments.

How is it that you are evaluating how other people spend their time? By how you spend your own time? Please. Next time you're watching your favorite TV show (American Idol, my fav show too) it wouldn't hurt to have a synth sitting in front of you (like I do) and practice some basic programming. That way it won't take so much of your precious time.

[Don Solaris]

Yeah, it's true about the chips - even if they're same, machine can sound totally different i.e. OB-8 v.s. P-5 rev3.

While i agree that Juno 60 and JX-3P do not sound the same, i find them more related in the sound than for example Juno 60 vs Alpha Juno. Or the JX-3P vs JX-8P.

If you ask me about what doesn't have the classic Roland sound - my vote would go to JX-8P.

[roginator]

jx3p is cool thing if you have pg 200 and new upgrade to send and recive midi cc

its definitly most underated analog synth.... BUT as some ppl say its not for everybody

[alexp]

Originally Posted by Black-Man

Again... you have *way* too much time on your hands. In the time it takes to edit 1 parameter using the slider, I can edit 4-5 parameters on the PG-200. And who cares if MIDI isn't available while you edit? Some of us can actually *play* our instruments.

Yes, I can also play my instruments.... Grade 8 piano here


I'm still standing by my belief that you dont need it. If your timing yourself on how long it takes you to program that "killer lead bro", then the PG is for you. If you realize that programming is actually less about how long it takes, and more about how much energy and dedication you put into it, you can do everything on the 3P that you can with the 200. Black-man are you by any chance, hanging on to like 20 PG's with intent to sell them at some point?


alexP

[MonoBrow]

Originally Posted by alexp

Yes, I can also play my instruments.... Grade 8 piano here


I'm still standing by my belief that you dont need it. If your timing yourself on how long it takes you to program that "killer lead bro", then the PG is for you. If you realize that programming is actually less about how long it takes, and more about how much energy and dedication you put into it, you can do everything on the 3P that you can with the 200. Black-man are you by any chance, hanging on to like 20 PG's with intent to sell them at some point?


alexP

Its maybe just me but the more intuive and fast the interface is the more i want to work on a synth.I dont really like endless menues or 1 data slider(yuck).I can work it but for me it is less fun.On the other side...i enjoy building modular patches which takes forever....Personal preference i suppose.

[alexp]

Originally Posted by Fluxpod

Its maybe just me but the more intuive and fast the interface is the more i want to work on a synth.I dont really like endless menues or 1 data slider(yuck).I can work it but for me it is less fun.On the other side...i enjoy building modular patches which takes forever....Personal preference i suppose.

Absolutely flux! I totally agree with you.... Having said that though, I do think its fairly intuitive, (one button to access the parameter, use the slider to adjust the parameter). Its a bit like the ESQ1. Its a lot easier than programming my Prophecy!!


alexP

[MonoBrow]

Originally Posted by alexp

Absolutely flux! I totally agree with you.... Having said that though, I do think its fairly intuitive, (one button to access the parameter, use the slider to adjust the parameter). Its a bit like the ESQ1. Its a lot easier than programming my Prophecy!!


alexP

Yeah i am familar with that from the r8 drum maschine.Its ok for me but...impatience....