Korg DW-8000 or Juno 106

[Pro5]

Originally Posted by Phurniture

The DW always sounded like an organ to me

Then you were holding it wrong





No way does the DW sound 'like an organ' (unless you use an organ patch of course) it SOUNDS like a tame 101 or a colder polysix ffs! (on the right sounds). WAY deeper than a 106.




106 is an extremely basic machine that looks the part, the DW is an 8 note poly, twin osc monster that doesn't look the part. Hence the confusion and 'placebo aspects' to the bias towards the Juno.

Put both synths behind a screen and hook up to a generic midi keyboard controller and go JUST on sounds - you'll soon be ditching the 106 for the DW if you have the option. I prefer the DW over my past Junos for sure (6,a1,a2). I prefer over the AX80, and In some ways it even gives my 101 and polysix a run for the money but in an *8* note poly with AT/VEL/MIDI and all the features from the others combined in one box! (except PWM which is lacking on a lot of Dual osc cheap synths and isn't that big a deal on them, more important on single osc synths for texture and nice to have on Dual VCO monster synths)

[Pro5]

Originally Posted by Careyn

The juno 106. Everybody from Sander Kleinenberg to Deep Dish to William Orbit used this. It is a classic tried and true instrument.

That's ONE way of looking at it.

The other way of looking at it is: It's been DONE to death, and on an extremely simple/sterile sounding synth like a 106 (not a 101 ) the world and his dog having used it on 'everything' is hardly a reason to pick one up now with so many other, once MORE expensive, options available for less due to lack of hype!

The OP isn't william orbit, WO got rid of his Jupiter 8 (he told me this himself) so in his case he's not buying 'the best synth for the money' he's bought/used whatever synths are there that he personally likes, but it doesn't mean it's 'better' than another synth (the DW, which it isn't).

106 was originally picked up because it was relatively cheap and hands on and midi - lots of people used it in the 80s/early 90s as they couldn't afford a jupiter etc. Then even skinter/home musicians read interviews about their favourite artists using it (not because it was 'the best' but because it was what they had) and assumed "If I buy THAT synth I can sound/be just like X artist". So then it built up a following as a cheap/cool synth (which it was when the price was lower!)

That has no bearing on it's merits vs a DW-8000. Some will prefer one of the other, some may prefer the tone on the Juno or the DW but you can't use the "this synth was USED by more people" argument cos in that case the M1 must be the best synth ever made and should be used by everyone today???

No way! the M1 sounds like crap today, but I'm sure we could post a list of hundreds of famous users, doesn't mean it's 'better' than a similar synth for similar or less money. What it does mean is buy one and sound like everyone else because, similar to the 106, the M1 is very limited and ALWAYS sounds like it always did. M1 is barely a synthesizer (not like D-50 which is a proper synth!) and 106 IS a synth but has a very limited range. So if it's already been used by 'everybody' why on earth would you want to copy all those same old sounds? At least with the DW there's a chance of making a sound nobody has heard yet, or failing that at least NOT sounding like a load of other records.

[flat earth]

One of the things I very much like about the DW8000, is its raspy brass charactor.

This sound captures that sizzle quite well.

[Careyn]

Originally Posted by Pro5

That's ONE way of looking at it.

The other way of looking at it is: It's been DONE to death, and on an extremely simple/sterile sounding synth like a 106 (not a 101 ) the world and his dog having used it on 'everything' is hardly a reason to pick one up now with so many other, once MORE expensive, options available for less due to lack of hype!

The OP isn't william orbit, WO got rid of his Jupiter 8 (he told me this himself) so in his case he's not buying 'the best synth for the money' he's bought/used whatever synths are there that he personally likes, but it doesn't mean it's 'better' than another synth (the DW, which it isn't).

106 was originally picked up because it was relatively cheap and hands on and midi - lots of people used it in the 80s/early 90s as they couldn't afford a jupiter etc. Then even skinter/home musicians read interviews about their favourite artists using it (not because it was 'the best' but because it was what they had) and assumed "If I buy THAT synth I can sound/be just like X artist". So then it built up a following as a cheap/cool synth (which it was when the price was lower!)

That has no bearing on it's merits vs a DW-8000. Some will prefer one of the other, some may prefer the tone on the Juno or the DW but you can't use the "this synth was USED by more people" argument cos in that case the M1 must be the best synth ever made and should be used by everyone today???

No way! the M1 sounds like crap today, but I'm sure we could post a list of hundreds of famous users, doesn't mean it's 'better' than a similar synth for similar or less money. What it does mean is buy one and sound like everyone else because, similar to the 106, the M1 is very limited and ALWAYS sounds like it always did. M1 is barely a synthesizer (not like D-50 which is a proper synth!) and 106 IS a synth but has a very limited range. So if it's already been used by 'everybody' why on earth would you want to copy all those same old sounds? At least with the DW there's a chance of making a sound nobody has heard yet, or failing that at least NOT sounding like a load of other records.

Sure being used by all these famous people is not a good enough reason to want one but I would take a juno 106 over a DW-8000 any day. It is a classic reliable tried and true type of synth to get the job done. Stable with a nice filter section and an intuitive layout. I used to copy presets of simple vst synths and the sound would come alive on the juno. You can also layer with plug-ins. Nick muir from bedrock said it best...

"The Roland JX8P I really like, and the Juno 106 still gets turned on now and again. For instance, if we've got a bass trucking along and it's not quite got the bottom end, the 106 will be really useful for adding something below.''

BEDROCK

[somant]

i got a dw8000 and a juno6 in the studio and have to say the juno6 gets more useage, as it is just a very good sounding, accessible machine. had it put away for a few years, but i sort of rediscovered it for its mature simplicity and punchy bass.

the dw8000 is the far more sophisticated piece though and quite rewarding if you dig into it...interface is not as intuitive obviously, but far from being a pain.

it probably depends on what other synths have to complement the juno or the dw8000. i appreciate the junos ability to hold its own even with "bigger" machines around, whereas the dw8000 can appear slightly obsolete when put next to, lets say, a Jp8000 or OB12.

looking at the price tag though, a lot speaks for the dw8000. they go for small money, even compared to a juno106.

[Teknobeam]

The DW8000 is probably not for everyone. If you are lazy, forget it. If you are stuck on easy, forget it. But if you dig deep, you will get some real gems. Fist and foremost is it's filter. that is it's number one redeeming quality. But it has a lot more.

[qblues]

I own a DW8000 and previously i tried a Juno-106 (considered trading it with my JP-8000). Although I liked the filters on the 106, i found it very limited (compared to my JP8k) because it only has one oscillator. The sub-oscillator helps but if you want to have a nice pad, you need to rely on the chorus and PWM instead of the typical 2 detuned oscillators. My veredict at the time was that, even though i liked the instrument, i could do a lot more with my JP. The DW8000 is a very capable instrument and not so difficult to program if you know what you're doing (all parameters are in the front panel). The sound is obviously very different and more aggressive than your typical Roland and that's what, to me, makes the instrument so interesting. By the way, Kevin Moore (Dream Theater) also used it (check out intro lead on Dream Theater's Pull Me Under).

Cheers.

[YashN]

I am fixing mine, but at least the synth engine works. I already loved that Korg filter, and to hear it in real polyphonic configuration instead of the paraphonic one in the Poly-800 is something.

Very inspiring synth.

What needs fixing:

1. Key triggers/keybed

2. Switches

[zaxmalloy]

I had both in my rig back in 1990 or so...

The Juno was great because of all the finger fun, but the DW had a more crisp and robust sound - together, they were a great pair to have in the studio.

I donated my DW8000 to my college after going back one year to do a presentation on synthesizers. That's right after I got an M1 and it seemed, at the time, an easy thing to do.

I held on to the 106 for a few years longer...but sold it about five years ago.

I often thought I might have let go of the wrong one first. Yet if I were going to re-buy both today I think I'd probably go for a DW8000 first - it just had that edge to it's sound and a great arpeggiator where the 106 always seemed soft to me...but it was also warmer...but I've got a ton of soft synths that can do that. That Korg can really cut through the mix.

Either way you're going to end up with one heckuva instrument.

[alexp]

Juno 106 is so overdone. I have both and the korg dw blows the Juno away. The people that love the 106 are the same people making dubstep because it's the fad, and probably own a mac just because they like the lit apple on the cover and how it makes them feel important on a stage. Get into the korg. It's fantastic. And god forbid, different!

[CoolColJ]

Piano is over done too, didn't stop anyone using it. It's just a good basic sound

[flat earth]

Originally Posted by CoolColJ

Piano is over done too, didn't stop anyone using it. It's just a good basic sound

True, but its an entirely different musical instrument. You don't buy a 'synthesizer' for one sound.


...unless you really crave that horrible 90s M1 piano sound

[projectwoofer]

Originally Posted by CoolColJ

Piano is over done too, didn't stop anyone using it. It's just a good basic sound

IMO the DW-8000 is far more interesting than the Juno in terms of basic sound...

[CoolColJ]

They say the same thing about the SQ80, and technically it should with all those nice waveforms, 3 oscillators, analog VCA and filter, and polyAT. But in practise for me I turn to the Juno 106 more often, and just fiddle with the sliders until I get what I want. With the SQ80 you need to have an exact idea of what you want

I never did get my EX8000 working since I bought one, and sold it off for parts, but it would be quite similar to the SQ80

[Teknobeam]

These are some sounds from my DW8000. No fx.
Paid about $100.00 with a dead battery.

[Teknobeam]

One more

[YashN]

Originally Posted by CoolColJ

I never did get my EX8000 working since I bought one, and sold it off for parts, but it would be quite similar to the SQ80

The EX-8000 has less modulation capabilities than the SQ-80.

[YashN]

Cool set of demos. I was just playing endlessly with a CS-80-type sound yesterday too.

Originally Posted by Teknobeam

These are some sounds from my DW8000. No fx.
Paid about $100.00 with a dead battery.

[pigger]

One of the keyboard stacks in my studio has a DW-8000, an ESQ-1 and a JX-10 top-to-bottom, making it easy to compare their sounds, which are all quite different from each other. I have found myself spending a great deal of time making sounds on all three of them; they all sound good to me, but have different characters. Having spent a lot of time programming my DX-7, I don't have a problem with one-slider synths.

I passed on a HS-60 a while back due to the failing osc. problem and the price; guy wanted $400 for it in not very good condition. I paid $250 for the EW (perfect cond.), $150 for the ESQ (needed a battery) and $300 for the JX-10 (very good cond.).

I am very happy with the DW's sound.

[Rane-Ex54]

Its a matter of opinion really, but Def the DW sound much better to me then 106. Plus someone earlier said 106 is "reliable"?? ummm voice chip issue anyone? usually DWs are strong except for internal battery replacement.

DW digital delay is killer

[projectwoofer]

Originally Posted by Rane-Ex54

DW digital delay is killer

Plus it can emulate PWM when used suitably...

[CoolColJ]

The delay is also out of phase, not good if you want to maintain mono compatibility

[projectwoofer]

Originally Posted by CoolColJ

The delay is also out of phase, not good if you want to maintain mono compatibility

Who said I'm using it in stereo?