Korg DW-8000 or Juno 106

[Dj Shaw-t]

Ok so I have decided to get an Ion and either a Juno 106 or Korg DW-8000. Looking for some pros and cons of each synth. I know the 106 has durability issues but I believe it is easier to program then the DW-8000. Does anyone have any experience programming the DW-8000? The 106 I am looking at is 400 while the DW-8000 is 225. However if I need to buy something like a BCR2000 to be able to properly edit the DW-8000 it will be around the same cost. Is the DW-8000 easy enough to program without something like the BCR?

The DW-8000 has gotten pretty good reviews on vintage synths but I can't find many threads on it here. Is there a reason why it isn't very popular? or as popular as the 106?

[Dj Shaw-t]

No DW-8000 users here?

[Yoozer]

The DW is going to be more versatile but will be as friendly in programming as an Alpha Juno or JX8P. IMHO, the 106 is slightly overpriced.

The 106 is popular because it was cheap, ubiquitous, and loaded with sliders - and unlike the 60 it could do MIDI, too. It's a "my first analog" for a lot of people. Not only has a DW the slider + parameter programming, it's also a hybrid with its sampled oscillators, which puts it on a lower rung of the pecking order than a DCO synth.

[Dj Shaw-t]

Is the programmng on the unit that bad in comparison to the 106? Also is it more durable than the 106 over long periods? What do you mean about the DW being lower on the pecking order.

Thanks for your help.

[Yoozer]

Originally Posted by Dj Shaw-t

Is the programmng on the unit that bad in comparison to the 106?

YouTube - Korg DW-6000 - Baba O'Reily Patch Programing shows how to program the 6000 - the 8000 is similar.

The main problem with choose-parameter-change-value synthesizers is that you can not make quick overall adjustments. In the case of the Alpha Juno this is made a bit worse by splitting the envelope up in Time/Level parameters - so instead of just using "attack" which is manageable with a single slider, you have to program T(ime)1 and L(evel)1.

Also is it more durable than the 106 over long periods?

The 106's durability story is based on the voice chips. 80017A VCF VCA JUNO-106 VOICE CHIP FILTER IC REPLACEMENT explains the how and why and offers replacements.

What do you mean about the DW being lower on the pecking order.

The price of a vintage synth depends on several factors. Character. Specifications. Ease of editing/programming. Numbers produced. Famous artists using it. Frequency of being used in actual tracks (not always easy to discover). The combined value of these factors is lower for the DW than for the 106.

[Dj Shaw-t]

So because the DW-8000 hasn't been used by many artists etc probably explains why I an pick one up cheaper. Anyone have experience with the getting good results out of the DW-8000.

Thanks for your help by the way. Appreciate the video

[3Crystals]

If you pick up a Juno-106 get one with serial number over 490,000 preferbly over 500,000[last production run] to avoid the voice chip issue.This is what I've read anyway..JD

[rockmanrock]

Originally Posted by Dj Shaw-t

So because the DW-8000 hasn't been used by many artists etc probably explains why I an pick one up cheaper. Anyone have experience with the getting good results out of the DW-8000.

Thanks for your help by the way. Appreciate the video

Alan Wilder used one in Depeche Mode in the mid 80s, there's a bit of provenance for you.

It's got a nice digital delay built in and the keyboard version has an arpeggiator so you can get hypnotic spacey soundscapes out of it.

They're quite different synths really. I agree that the 106 is a bit pumped up in price and the DW8000 will be a relative bargain at about half the price.

Jexus has a nice demo of the DW here.

Good long mp3 demo of the DW6000 (quite similar to the 8000) here.

[Derp]

Originally Posted by Dj Shaw-t

Anyone have experience with the getting good results out of the DW-8000.

It ain't the easiest to program out there, but it isn't the worst, either. You can coax some pretty decent basslines out of it (Juno Reactor) and the strings on it are very spectacular if you don't mind putting in the time. I liked the ones I've had in the past, but it isn't for everybody, that's for sure.

[Dj Shaw-t]

I am pretty impressed by the demo. It sounds different then what I already have but then again this will be my first analog.

[Derp]

Originally Posted by Dj Shaw-t

I am pretty impressed by the demo. It sounds different then what I already have but then again this will be my first analog.

Put the breaks on a sec there. The DW-8000 isn't fully analog. Even though the filter is analog, the oscillators are digital waveforms.

[Dj Shaw-t]

Damn... was looking for a real analog.

[Oli]

Originally Posted by Dj Shaw-t

Damn... was looking for a real analog.

Just judge by your ears. It can do interesting and useful sounds. If you are capable with DIY, you can extend the sound capabilities quite a bit, with new waveforms, and filter mod. The behaviour of an analogue filter is already part of the character of an analogue synth anyway.

I may be mistaken, but I think the DW-8000 has only one filter, for all voices. Normally, one would want a filter per voice, for envelope triggering.

I still think the synth is a great buy. There is also the EX-8000, if you need a rack unit (usually cheaper shipping, for one).

[Altitude909]

Originally Posted by Dj Shaw-t

Damn... was looking for a real analog.

lol. it is a real analog. Just because it has digital waveforms does not make it not analog. By that definition, the 106 is not analog either since it has DCO's. VCO based synths take time to warm up, have tuning issues, etc. They can sound good (Moog) or like crap (SCI sixtrak)

And as far as people "not using" the 8000, Rick Wakeman used it extensively. It is much, much deeper device then the 106

[Dj Shaw-t]

lol I guess I worded that wrong. K thanks guys, still haven't decided on what to do. ^^^ do you use a DW-8000

[Altitude909]

Originally Posted by Dj Shaw-t

lol I guess I worded that wrong. K thanks guys, still haven't decided on what to do. ^^^ do you use a DW-8000

I have the ex8000 which is the rack version. The only difference is no arp. One great thing about the DW is that it has an excellent sysex implementation so I have ALL the editable parameters programmed into my controller which makes an excellent physical interface for it. I also used to own a Juno-60 so I have some experience with both and I can safely say, get both. There some (very little) crossover but having two osc per voice makes the DW a totally different beast.

[rockmanrock]

Originally Posted by Oli

Just judge by your ears. It can do interesting and useful sounds. If you are capable with DIY, you can extend the sound capabilities quite a bit, with new waveforms, and filter mod. The behaviour of an analogue filter is already part of the character of an analogue synth anyway.

I may be mistaken, but I think the DW-8000 has only one filter, for all voices. Normally, one would want a filter per voice, for envelope triggering.

I still think the synth is a great buy. There is also the EX-8000, if you need a rack unit (usually cheaper shipping, for one).

It's the Poly 800 that only has one filter for all its voices, the DWs have a filter per voice. They're quite unique and characterful filters too, they make a good contrast to a Roland.

[Oli]

Originally Posted by rockmanrock

It's the Poly 800 that only has one filter for all its voices, the DWs have a filter per voice. They're quite unique and characterful filters too, they make a good contrast to a Roland.

Hi, thanks for clearing that up.

I also like the sound. Does nice sweeps.

Cheers

[Jim Stout]

I had the 106 for years. I think we all know its great.

But..... I would have to say go for the DW-8000. It was one of Korgs best sound units for warm pads and basses. the Arpeggiator is really cool too.!

my 2

[sctt_stone]

Hey. If you are doing Hip Hop go wiht the Juno106 and you will not be disapointed.

I have had mine for about 4 months or so and have been blown away by the the fact that I can pull out Black Eye Peas sounds. Lady GaGa Ext...

If these guys are not using it I am amazed. The leads and pads are awsome and the synth is incredably hands on. You cajn tweak the synth while it is being sequenced and get sick sounds out of it.

It also does great sub bass, filter sweeps, leads, pads, and chords.

Can you tell I love it?

It has a really smooth polished sound to it that fits with Hip Hop and dance music.

I also have a Prophet 5 and have been using the Juno106 a lot more lattley.

Originally Posted by Dj Shaw-t

Ok so I have decided to get an Ion and either a Juno 106 or Korg DW-8000. Looking for some pros and cons of each synth. I know the 106 has durability issues but I believe it is easier to program then the DW-8000. Does anyone have any experience programming the DW-8000? The 106 I am looking at is 400 while the DW-8000 is 225. However if I need to buy something like a BCR2000 to be able to properly edit the DW-8000 it will be around the same cost. Is the DW-8000 easy enough to program without something like the BCR?

The DW-8000 has gotten pretty good reviews on vintage synths but I can't find many threads on it here. Is there a reason why it isn't very popular? or as popular as the 106?

[spunkadellic]

the dw has a no bueno filter - the juno filter is good - so if you plan on doing lots of filter sweeps go with the juno

however the dw is by far more complex and has a much larger palette of sounds

[fanriffic]

Originally Posted by spunkadellic

the dw has a no bueno filter - the juno filter is good - so if you plan on doing lots of filter sweeps go with the juno

however the dw is by far more complex and has a much larger palette of sounds

I would disagree.. I feel the DW's filters are one of its strengths.A quite unique synth.

I wouldn't get caught up on the analog/digital labels..at least in this case...the DW is 'warmer','fatter' and 'thicker'..than many full analogs.

[Dj Shaw-t]

Originally Posted by sctt_stone

Hey. If you are doing Hip Hop go wiht the Juno106 and you will not be disapointed.

I have had mine for about 4 months or so and have been blown away by the the fact that I can pull out Black Eye Peas sounds. Lady GaGa Ext...

If these guys are not using it I am amazed. The leads and pads are awsome and the synth is incredably hands on. You cajn tweak the synth while it is being sequenced and get sick sounds out of it.

It also does great sub bass, filter sweeps, leads, pads, and chords.

Can you tell I love it?

It has a really smooth polished sound to it that fits with Hip Hop and dance music.

I also have a Prophet 5 and have been using the Juno106 a lot more lattley.

Has anyone has success getting theses same type of sounds out of the DW? I really loved the sound of the demo that I heard above of the DW but I really did want something that was analog. I just cant justify spending double what the DW costs to get a Juno 106.

[Jim Stout]

Got news for ya, the Juno 106 uses DCOs

"Digitally Controlled Oscillator"

It's digital with analog filters.

Just like the DW-8000

[Dj Shaw-t]

Thanks your either the first to mention that or I have been completely incoherent the whole time this thread has been open. So you suggest the DW?

[fanriffic]

Originally Posted by Jim Stout

Got news for ya, the Juno 106 uses DCOs

"Digitally Controlled Oscillator"

It's digital with analog filters.

Just like the DW-8000

..Not quite.

The DW has a Digital Waveform Generator System (DWGS)-essentially the 'oscillators' are tiny looped samples of the respective waves.

The 106,however uses DCO's which are essentially VCO's being 'synced' to a digital clock-hence the better timing,stability etc...but the waveform output remains analog.


but really...this all means very little.

[Derp]

Originally Posted by Oli

I may be mistaken, but I think the DW-8000 has only one filter, for all voices. Normally, one would want a filter per voice, for envelope triggering.

That's the Poly-800. The DW's have a filter for each voice.

[chrisrnps]

Originally Posted by Dj Shaw-t

Thanks your either the first to mention that or I have been completely incoherent the whole time this thread has been open. So you suggest the DW?

Actually, that post was incoherent.

A "DCO" is a Digitally Controlled Oscillator. Meaning that a digital clock circuit is used to generate a reset pulse that determines the pitch of an oscillator (which is itself still an analog oscillator, just a digitally controlled one).

In contrast, a Voltage Controlled Oscillator, or VCO, uses a voltage to control the 'reset pulse' that determines the frequency of the oscillator, typically by the action of a capacitor charging and discharging as a result of an incoming control-voltage. Because this can be a less stable 'pulse' source than a digital crystal-based master clock, fluctuations in pitch can result, which can be said to sound more 'organic', 'phat', or what-have-you, due to the lesser degree of absolute precision of this type of 'clock' signal due to fluctuations in temperature, tolerances of components, etc.

The oscillators in the 106 are "DCO"s - digitally-controlled analog oscillators, followed by analog filter and amp sections.

The oscillators in the DW8000 are digital - digitally-controlled digital oscillators, followed by analog filter and amp sections.

If you're looking for whichever's technically "more analog" on paper, that would be the 106.

I own a 106 and after hearing the demo clip posted earlier in this thread, now I want a DW8000 as well.

[Dj Shaw-t]

Cool thanks for clearing that up. Yeah that demo does sound pretty awsome. Actually pretty excited at going to look at one. lol were you saying my post was incoherent or the post about both synths being digital. I appreciate all the help on here by the way.

[Derp]

You know what, I really wanna see this whole DCO vs. DSP thing put to rest. Anybody want to fire off a blind test kinda thing between a DCO and a DSP generated oscillator that sound relatively alike? I'd do it myself, but I don't have any DCO synths anymore. I remember some DCO's like on the Pulse can sound very VCO like and some DCO's sound pretty sterile like with the Alpha Juno. Is it all in the type of clock used, the programming of chips, or what?