The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Synths for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Roland Jupiter 6
Old 9th February 2019
  #481
Quote:
Originally Posted by autoy View Post
To me the Jupiter 6 is the king of electro, techno, rave and electronic weirdness, in a way the American polys can’t touch.
Overall, and this would be a good starting place for a healthy discussion, for whatever reasons*, the Roland sound certainly best captures thoe electro/techno/rave/dance/whatever genres. No argument there. However, the JP6 is one among many Roland machines within those genres. Honestly, it certainly has a lesser stature than the SH-101, TB-303, and Juno 106 within the golden and crystallization periods.

I absolutely understand the desire for a particular sound such as Roland. Not only because of personal preference, but also due to suitability for the tonal expectations of a genre. Myself, I dislike the "techno" and dance music genres and have no interest in those styles. Consequently it is of little surprise that the Roland sound, which I associate with those genres, never works its way into my music very well. Roland synths never worked for my music in ways that Sequential, ARP, Moog, and Oberheim would. This is why I (generally) avoid Roland synths** these days despite the fact that their classic lineup, even the "budget" instruments like the JX-3P, sound great.

*note: my personal opinion for the reasons why are: (1) the use of other Roland instruments (Juno 106, SH-101, MC-202, etc...) due to their brand association with the TB-303, inarguably the most important instrument for the early genre, (2) the wide availability and low cost of Roland products in the 90s used market, (3) the technical performance of the classic Roland filter in its various incarnations allows for a very musical sound, even with insanely high resonance, and (4) the close association with the "Roland sound" as being the standard or expectation for what electro/techno/rave/acid is "supposed" to sound like.

**note: I may get a SH-09 or SH-2 one of these days because they capture the early new wave sound in ways that my other instruments do not. A JP-4 would be great, but they've priced themselves out of my interest in them.
Old 9th February 2019
  #482
Lives for gear
 
wjmwpg's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Meeker View Post
One of the great things about a consensus among experts is that it allows for the identification of trends that are far more valid or reliable than the subjective opinion of a single individual.
I believe this is true in quantifiable disciplines, like science and politics, but not for instruments employed by artists to make music.
Old 9th February 2019
  #483
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjmwpg View Post
I believe this is true in quantifiable disciplines, like science and politics, but not for instruments employed by artists to make music.
I agree. However, frequency response is a quantifiable attribute that can be observed, measured, and ultimately compared. Surely it is possible to measure the frequency of the Jupiter 6 and make comparisons. While I never did this test while owning a JP6 (twice), this is possible*.

Would any of the Jupiter 6 owners be willing to perform some type of frequency measure so that the question can be objectively settled?

*note: however, I did analyze the OB-Xa and Prophet 5.
Old 10th February 2019
  #484
Gear Maniac
 
mima85's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Meeker View Post
Would any of the Jupiter 6 owners be willing to perform some type of frequency measure so that the question can be objectively settled?
If I'd still have with me the Jupiter 8, I'd have recorded some clips for you. Unfortunately I didn't recorded anything when I was compairing my Jupiters, but I found some clips I recorded at the times I was doing the mods to my Jupiter 6. At a certain moment I had my hands on another Jupiter 6 belonging to another person, who asked me to replicate my mods to it. So, prior to do the work, I loaded the soundset from my Jupiter 6 to his (of course I did a backup of his sounds before overwriting them with mine ), put them on different channels on my mixer with no EQ nor compression nor effects applied to any of them, one panned hard left and the other panned hard right, set both machines at the very same volume level (checked with oscilloscope by playing a pure, single oscillator square wave sound on both) and played both synths together via MIDI with the same patch active on them and recorded the output of both machines simultaneously. I ended having some clips where on the left channel there was one Jupiter 6 and on the right channel the other. I splitted the 2 channels in 2 different WAV files for each recording, and this is what I got:

Original - Modded
Original - Modded
Original - Modded
Original - Modded
Original - Modded
Original - Modded
Original - Modded
Original - Modded
Original - Modded

Please excuse me the bad and trivial playing, this was not intended to have some musical or artistical meaning but just to compare the two machines. On the "modded" clips you can hear that the filter cutoff level is higher, this is because I changed the calibration of the filter tracking in my machine. But the patches were exactely the same on both synths.

So yes, a stock Jupiter 6 sounds generally thinner than a Jupiter 8. But my modded Jupiter 6 definitely didn't sound thinner than my Jupiter 8, rather, when programmed to sound as much similar as I could, they were most of the times at about the same level of fatness, and some times I even found my 6 fatter than the 8.

Could also be that my 8 was in need of a capacitor change in the output stage, this being the cause of its lighter sound. On mine the only thing I recapped was the power supply. Here for example oldgearguy tells that had multiple Jupiter 8s (5 or 6, lucky guy), and kept the first one he bought because happened to sound better than the others. So maybe there could be differences in sound between Jupiter 8s, depending on the revision or (more likely) the condition of their capacitors, and maybe it happened that mine was one of the thinner sounding machines. I don't know, and unfortunately I won't never know as I owned only one Jupiter 8, so I don't have other machines to compare to.
Old 10th February 2019
  #485
Here for the gear
 

[QUOTE=mima85;13801925]If I'd still have with me the Jupiter 8, I'd have recorded some clips for you. Unfortunately I didn't recorded anything when I was compairing my Jupiters, but I found some clips I recorded at the times I was doing the mods to my Jupiter 6. At a certain moment I had my hands on another Jupiter 6 belonging to another person, who asked me to replicate my mods to it.

If you don't mind me asking, what are these mods? How hard to do?
Ta
Old 10th February 2019
  #486
Gear Maniac
 
mima85's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cires View Post
If you don't mind me asking, what are these mods? How hard to do?
Ta
No problem. The topic is treated in detail in this thread.

The mods are quite simple, it's just matter of solder some resistors, change some capacitors and calibrate the synth in a special way. Of course, if you're not familiar with electronics and with the use of a soldering iron, it's better to ask a tech to do the job.
Old 10th February 2019
  #487
I don't know about anyone else, but I will laugh if anyone in the "Jupiter 6 is beyond reproach" camp gets theirs mod'd, because that alone is admission that sonically things were not optimal.
Old 10th February 2019
  #488
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Meeker View Post
1. The general consensus among bonafide synth enthusiasts, including published authors such as Peter Forrest and Julian Colbeck, is that the Jupiter 6 is related, but sonically inferior, to the Jupiter 8.
In Keyfax 3, Julian Colbeck gave both the Jupiter 8 and Jupiter 6 identical ratings of three stars. He had good things (although different good things) to say about both.

I've actually had the pleasure of talking to Julian a couple times, and pulled his old Keyfax book out of the back closet to double-check if I remembered correctly.

I did.
Old 10th February 2019
  #489
Lives for gear
 
7 Hz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Meeker View Post
Surely it is possible to measure the frequency of the Jupiter 6 and make comparisons. While I never did this test while owning a JP6 (twice), this is possible*.

Would any of the Jupiter 6 owners be willing to perform some type of frequency measure so that the question can be objectively settled?

Drunken late night amateur science you say? I'm in!

MKS-80 vs J6 on noise. FIlter etc wide open no res. Clean path: synth->xdesk->usbpre-2->audition.

My J6 is modded, see threads on that.

Roland Jupiter 6-j6-vs-mks-80-noise.jpg
Attached Thumbnails
Roland Jupiter 6-j6-vs-mks-80-noise.jpg  
Attached Files

j6 (7zh modded) noise.wav (2.30 MB, 788 views)

mks-80 noise.wav (1.63 MB, 957 views)


Last edited by 7 Hz; 10th February 2019 at 03:38 AM..
Old 10th February 2019
  #490
Lives for gear
 
7 Hz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Meeker View Post
I don't know about anyone else, but I will laugh if anyone in the "Jupiter 6 is beyond reproach" camp gets theirs mod'd, because that alone is admission that sonically things were not optimal.
Dude my J6 is modded loads:

Europa (amazing)
Envelope mod (smoother)
Bypass cap replace (deeper?)
All panel sliders and pots replaced (nice and smooth)
All slider, switch, and knob caps replaced (nice fresh colours!)
Intersil ITS80141 replaced (not fun or cheap or easy to obtain)
It is also clean as a whistle.
I think I love it more than life itself.

The J6 is by no means perfect. But nothing is. If something had a character that someone likes, often that person will work on that thing to improve it.

Modification of tools is central to technological progress.

If a tool is modified, I would argue that gives that tool greater, not less, standing in the evolution of that type of tool. We vote with our attention.

Last edited by 7 Hz; 10th February 2019 at 04:05 AM..
Old 10th February 2019
  #491
Lives for gear
 
7 Hz's Avatar
Don't worry baby

*I* love you

Don't listen to what they say

You are perfect to me

Roland Jupiter 6-j6-neon.jpg

Together, forever.
Attached Thumbnails
Roland Jupiter 6-j6-neon.jpg  
Old 10th February 2019
  #492
Lives for gear
 
raffor's Avatar
 

I personally would not call the Jupiter-6 "thin" but I can share a certain sentiment that the JP-6 is one of the more correct sounding, analog synths out there. That has not influenced my opinion however and a Jupiter-6 and Matrix-12 have been the stable for my analog sounds for years. In between I tried many more analog classics, like OB-8, Prophet-5, Jupiter-8, etc. But in the end, I just like the JP-6 better than anything listed.

I think the Jupiter-6 is not an all sweet spot synth. For me, this is the only analog Roland synth that is not limited by Roland shackles. Take the Jupiter-8 for example. A beautiful synth, color full, heavy, full of quality sliders and knobs. However, when I owned a JP-8 I was greatly disappointed. Not that the synth was sounding bad, but the synth let you do nothing out of the ordinary. Cutoff was limited and to open wider you had to use the filter envelope, just to name an example. For me it is a preset synths. Nothing wrong with it and I have still some other Rolands that follow the principles and that are good for this or that. But pushing analog to the limits, these machines mostly fail. The Jupiter-6 was not restricted in any kind. Multiple of octaves of filter modulation or pitch. This thing is insane what you can do. It has lots to tricks up the sleeve that lets you do create sound effects, drum sounds, or just different sounds with the one modulation oscillator approach (Sync and cross modulation from one oscillator). Of course, you can do all kind of analog style sounds as well. Just not as fat but one can also contribute this to the filter a little, that has the tendency to thin out the sound. Thin or not, the Jupiter-6 is one of the synths you can put into the mix without much EQ. Mine has plenty of bass, btw. At least I don't EQ more in there. It always finds its place in the mix.

Don't forget, the inert of the JP6 are almost identical to the SH-101 and besides Roland shackles, these things can sound very close. But nobody cares about that. Nevertheless, for many, many years, the Jupiter-6 was one of the sacred synths that had a multimode filter. The BP Filter is the best I have and I do have a lot of stuff in my studio. I love the Jupiter-6. It is so direct, so responsive while offering the most of sound synthesis with such a small amount of sliders and knobs. You can wip out sound after sound in record time. However, I am not blind and not without reason I have a Matrix-12 in tandem with the Jupiter-6. Maybe that gives you an idea that complex synths attract me. But there are synths they just return a fuller sound and there are people, they don't appreciate deep diving into sound synthesis. So, there will be haters and lovers.
Old 10th February 2019
  #493
Here for the gear
As a member of Team Jupiter 6, I love this thread.

I’m always amazed at how polarizing the JP6 is. Hard to think of any other classic synth that gets scrutinized as much…

Was curious what hardware effects / pedals people use with their JP6’s / JP8’s. I use a Boss CE-3 Chorus (cheaper than the CE-1 or CE-2, and is stereo). The Strymon Big Sky Reverb keeps calling out to me, but it’s on the expensive side.

Last edited by Yavn; 10th February 2019 at 06:55 AM..
Old 10th February 2019
  #494
Lives for gear
Own a Jupiter 6 with Europaas well as the J4. Extensive use on the Jupiter 8 as well. Slept on an 8 for $1500 to get an Oberheim Xpander years ago...have some regrets but I really felt like I had the bases covered between the 4 and the 6.

My experience doing many different kinds of work with the 6 is that it fits very well with both modern production techniques that some might use softsynths for as well as retro flavors like synth pop, new wave and throwback house/techno/acid/etc.

I think it’s not so much that it lacks low end but rather that the low end is usable in a mix...as I’ve and other stated in this post and other...very little eq is needed provided that you develop sounds/patches around other instruments.

That said I’ve made huge sounding bass and sub patches that have clarity on festival PA’s...I get that it’s not a wooly as some of the American polysynths but the purity(...as well as low noise floor) of tone of the J6 is on par with any modern synth being made today...with all the vintage tones of the 80’s as well. You just have to get deep and learn all the in’s and outs of it. It’s deeper than you might think.

Also a trick and excuse me if this has been mentioned already is to use a splitter cable from the XLR output jack to 2 1/4” plugs to create fake stereo that you can process further independently.

Last edited by sirdss; 10th February 2019 at 09:58 AM.. Reason: Finished thoughts and that darn autocorrect.
Old 10th February 2019
  #495
Gear Maniac
 
mima85's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Meeker View Post
I will laugh if anyone in the "Jupiter 6 is beyond reproach" camp gets theirs mod'd, because that alone is admission that sonically things were not optimal.
Never said the contrary. In factory state the Jupiter 6's sound IS NOT optimal. When you raise the resonance the rest of the sound (the "body") quickly goes down in volume due to an excessive counter-compensation. The capacitors in the CV smoothing circuits are undersized so the aliasing due to the stepped EG and LFO signals, which are being generated digitally, reaches the audio path. Roland used ceramic capacitors in the filters where film ones should've been preferred. And the VCA bipolar blocking capacitors were inadequate too, influencing the circuit response on the bass range. If the Jupiter 6 would have been already optimal, there wouldn't be need for these mods.

The mods address all these issues and bring the Jupiter 6 to another class of sound, less constricted and more alive.
Old 10th February 2019
  #496
Lives for gear
 
raffor's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Meeker View Post
I don't know about anyone else, but I will laugh if anyone in the "Jupiter 6 is beyond reproach" camp gets theirs mod'd, because that alone is admission that sonically things were not optimal.
I am kind of surprised that someone that defends the Prophet-6 with tooth and nail will find the Jupiter-6 thin. I have both and while they both excel at different things, the Jupiter-6 does sound more vintage to me. And I would bet that you have never owned a Jupiter-6 either. You might played with one for 15 minutes, moved the sliders from min to max. That is not a synth you can learn in a blink. This synth has too much of working space and not all is sweet spot. Once you have one in the Studio you will appreciate the air it gives you to create unusual things.

Having said that, I am in the midst of copying my Jupiter-6 into my work horse Prophet-12 and I am learning a lot to make the 12 sound as muffled and vintage sounding. While the oscillators are easy to copy over, the filter is a different story. But it is a fun project.
Old 10th February 2019
  #497
Quote:
Originally Posted by raffor View Post
I am kind of surprised that someone that defends the Prophet-6 with tooth and nail will find the Jupiter-6 thin. I have both and while they both excel at different things, the Jupiter-6 does sound more vintage to me.
While not a direct comparison, at one time I owned a JP6, OB-Xa, and Prophet 5 at the same time. The JP6 was overwhelmed by the Xa (as most are). The P5 could keep up with the Xa, but wasn't as deep or thick sounding.

Fast forward 20 years later.

The Prophet 6 holds its own against the Xa. I'd venture to say it fares better than the P5 because of the sub-oscillator and ability to use the HP filter to boost the low end.

From this experience, I would venture that the Prophet 6 sounds larger than the JP6, although this is merely conjecture. That being said, the JP6 and Prophet series sound nothing alike. The filters, particularly how each synth handles resonance, is different. Honestly, I prefer the JP6's resonance over many synths, new and vintage; it handles high Q very well.

Keep in mind, that I am critiquing one aspect of the JP6 (low end/size) and not the entire instrument. There is plenty of upside to the Jupiter 6. I mean, I respected it enough to own two Jupiter 6's. In the end, however, the classic American "sound" fits my aesthetic more than Roland.

The JP6 works well with a Roland monosynth to cover its weak areas in terms of monophonic lines. It's a great polysynth; I always found it lacking for bass and leads. It owns the midrange, however. That's a good thing.
Old 11th February 2019
  #498
Lives for gear
 
Nigel99's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Meeker View Post
I agree, they are the only person I've met that have stated that. In the goal of attempting to clamp down on Internet misinformation, it should be acknowledged that:

1. The general consensus among bonafide synth enthusiasts, including published authors such as Peter Forrest and Julian Colbeck, is that the Jupiter 6 is related, but sonically inferior, to the Jupiter 8.

2. Similarly, there is agreement among synth collectors, owners, and users with hands-on experience comparing the Jupiter 6 to other classic analog polysynths that the JP-6 has lower and/or the least low end. The adjective typically used is "thin." This is my personal opinion as well.

3. However, there is also agreement that the JP6 is a nice synth overall with a good tone. Few people disagree with this (there are some), but most experienced users acknowledge the 6 as being decent.

4. As further evidence that the low end is lacking in the JP6, arguments have been made examining the links between the Jupiter and the MKS-80, which certainly shares at least some lineage to the Jupiter 6. The argument specifically calls our attention to the equalization circuits that Roland added to the MKS-80 specifically giving the low end a bit of a boost.

5. When I had a Jupiter 6 I would typically add EQ to the low end (low shelf, approximately set around 150hz) to beef things up. This is very effective.

6. No synths are perfect. So what if the JP6 is a little thin? The Oberheim OB-Xa has its less-than-perfect features, as does the JP8, Prophet 5, and so forth. The Prophet 5, for example, is the least huge sounding of the classic polys but it still ended up on thousands of productions, probably defining what a polysynth should sound like. Heck, the Memorymoog has (in my opinion) too much low end, making it unwieldy in certain productions.

Best to all.
Opinions not facts here. Read on people...
Old 11th February 2019
  #499
Lives for gear
 
xanax's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Meeker View Post
While not a direct comparison, at one time I owned a JP6, OB-Xa, and Prophet 5 at the same time. The JP6 was overwhelmed by the Xa (as most are). The P5 could keep up with the Xa, but wasn't as deep or thick sounding.

Fast forward 20 years later.

The Prophet 6 holds its own against the Xa. I'd venture to say it fares better than the P5 because of the sub-oscillator and ability to use the HP filter to boost the low end.

From this experience, I would venture that the Prophet 6 sounds larger than the JP6, although this is merely conjecture. That being said, the JP6 and Prophet series sound nothing alike. The filters, particularly how each synth handles resonance, is different. Honestly, I prefer the JP6's resonance over many synths, new and vintage; it handles high Q very well.

Keep in mind, that I am critiquing one aspect of the JP6 (low end/size) and not the entire instrument. There is plenty of upside to the Jupiter 6. I mean, I respected it enough to own two Jupiter 6's. In the end, however, the classic American "sound" fits my aesthetic more than Roland.

The JP6 works well with a Roland monosynth to cover its weak areas in terms of monophonic lines. It's a great polysynth; I always found it lacking for bass and leads. It owns the midrange, however. That's a good thing.
JP6 is much closer to OB6 (rather than P6) imo because of the whole multimode 12db bandpass filter.

OB6 has killed a lot of my GAS for JP6 tbh.
Old 11th February 2019
  #500
Lives for gear
 
maisonvague's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Meeker View Post
In the goal of attempting to clamp down on Internet misinformation, it should be acknowledged that...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nigel99 View Post
Opinions not facts here.
Exactly!

In reading some of these posts, I feel there is too much conflating of subjective opinion with objective fact.

But then, that's a general problem at GS, not exclusive to this thread.

Opinions can also change over time--as can consensus--as more people have personal experience with instruments to counter Peter Forrest or Gordon Reid (two highly respected but still opinionated experts on synthesizers).

For years, Gordon Reid's rather lackluster impression of the Jupiter-4 kept if off people's radar. But no more. Since his infamous review, other musicians have gotten a hold of them and discovered for themselves just what it has to offer.

Anyway, I think the JP-6 is a great synth. If I didn't already have other CEM-based polys, I would want one for sure.
Old 11th February 2019
  #501
Quote:
Originally Posted by maisonvague View Post
In reading some of these posts, I feel there is too much conflating of subjective opinion with objective fact.
Objectively, I think it is pretty obvious to anyone with ears and decent monitors that the JP6 is thin.

Old 11th February 2019
  #502
Lives for gear
 
autoy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Meeker View Post
Objectively, I think it is pretty obvious to anyone with ears and decent monitors that the JP6 is thin.

Objectively, it's not.

Old 12th February 2019
  #503
Lives for gear
 
7 Hz's Avatar
In case we are getting mixed up here:

Subjective refers to personal perspectives, feelings, or opinions entering the decision making process.

Objective refers to the elimination of subjective perspectives and a process that is purely based on hard facts.

Here are two triangle wave sweeps, from the JP-6 and the MKS-80.

Roland Jupiter 6-j6-vs-mks-80-triangle-sweep.jpg

Roland Jupiter 6-j6-vs-mks-80-triangle-sweep-waveform.jpg

We can see the obvious MKS-80 'bass boost' centred around 120hz, looks like +5db?

The JP-6 is very flat till about 100hz, where there is a gradual drop of about -2db at 20hz. Looks like the MKS-80 does the same.

There is nothing that makes me think that somehow the JP-6 cannot reproduce bass frequencies, or is overly deficient there. IMO the MKS-80 bass boost is a bit annoying. I'd rather add EQ myself.

I'd be interested in any other sweeps from other synths as a comparison. For sure a Jupiter 8.

Also surprised no one commented on the 10db dip in the bass end of the noise files. I think it would be likely that Roland filtered out the bottom end from the noise on both these synths.

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Meeker View Post
I think it is pretty obvious to anyone with ears and decent monitors that the JP6 is thin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by autoy View Post
it's not.
I think one massive part of the controversy is that the filter resonance does steal a lot of signal level (as discussed in this thread). Without either a) adjusting the overall level to compensate, or b) doing the mod, it is easy to see this level drop as the sound thinning out. I guess that 'feature' used to, and continues to, trip people up. I fully admit it isn't the best thing, but it is easy to correct for.

Another thing is just the overall tone. I'd guess the Rolands have less distortion overall (compared to a P5 etc), and a more precise sounding filter.
Attached Thumbnails
Roland Jupiter 6-j6-vs-mks-80-triangle-sweep-waveform.jpg   Roland Jupiter 6-j6-vs-mks-80-triangle-sweep.jpg  
Attached Files

j6 triangle sweep.wav (1.96 MB, 648 views)

mks-80 triangle sweep.wav (2.03 MB, 626 views)


Last edited by 7 Hz; 12th February 2019 at 01:28 AM..
Old 12th February 2019
  #504
Quote:
Originally Posted by autoy View Post
Objectively, it's not.

This clip sounds great. Never said the JP6 didn't. However, it is thin compared to the "biggies" as stated earlier. Furthermore, it is somewhat second rate in monophonic lines (however, most polysynths are in this department). That being said, the demonstrator does a great job of playing to the JP6's strengths and generally avoiding the weaknesses.

Obviously, if someone is keen on the Roland sound a JP6, JP8, or MKS80 is kind of a must-have.
Old 12th February 2019
  #505
Lives for gear
 
kirkelein's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEL Recording View Post
The JP6 is one of my favorite synths ever... The way it sits and cuts in a mix in insane. The way it has that clear open ALMOST digital top end, but NONE of the veil or edgy in a bad way qualities digital has. Such a fun AND POWERFUL synth!
Right there mate! You can EQ it to shreds and it still sounds great. Absolutely wonderful to work with in a mix.
Old 13th February 2019
  #506
Lives for gear
Well...so much opinion on this. I’m very thankful for mine. Just looked them up on eBay and yeah they’re still a great bargain for what they are. I guess they’re a cult synth...loved by some and for others not a great fit. I’d say if you can hold on to yours and keep trying to work with it on a track when it seems like something is missing there’s a lot of rewards to discover. Especially with the Europa mod.

Besides the split XLR trick I do I also like running it in stereo though a UA 2-610 with the input gain pretty high...not so much as distortion but thickens the mid-range a in nice way. It’s cool just out of the mono output jack as well.

Any actual Jupiter 6 owners have any tricks to bring out the best of this synth?

Besides mods! Love mine stock and just how Roland designed it!
Old 13th February 2019
  #507
Oh, just because I made not have mentioned this before: being the "biggest" isn't always a good thing. For example, it doesn't take more than 2-3 tracks of the OB-Xa and you are pretty much out of room. Part of the utility of, say, a Prophet 5 or 6 is that it is a middle-weight contender. You can easily pile on 5-6 tracks no problem. The Jupiter 6 should be understood in that framework.

From my personal recollection, the JP6 worked great with a Juno and Roland monosynth handling bass. The 106 especially has a different feel to it that is very complimentary, and a SH-101 or SH-09 can handle your monophonic needs quite readily.

Honestly, no single synth is the be-all/end-all. The system of instruments and how they compliment one another is what really counts.
Old 18th February 2019
  #508
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregkoNYC View Post
Fellow Europa owners... Is it common to have to reboot the synth now and then to get patches to load reliably and stay in tune? It's pretty sporadic in my case, but occasionally I have to reboot my JP6 for it to work properly, in which case it's stable/ solid.

It's (almost) definitely a patch/ memory issue than an OSC tuning issue as it's only problematic on certain patches (and the patches that should actually be loaded are all off until I power cycle)

I'll admit I haven't really dug into it yet since it's just a minor annoyance, but if there's something I can do to resolve patch loading/ tuning issues that... well.... wouldn't suck.

Thanks all.

Greg
I also have problems with my Europa jupiter 6, it seems a bit buggy to me:
-I have to reboot sometimes before my patches are sounding correct, when this happens the HOLD knob is on and I can't switch it off, only rebooting solves this


-Sometimes when booting I get code E-4? If I look in the europa manual it says this:
Bad Europa board settings found and defaults loaded. Europa uses part of the NVRAM
for storing current board state and settings. This code is shown when the area contains
bad/bogus settings. This failure can also be shown when the board is first powered up
after Europa is installed, the controller board’s battery is failing, or if a boot to the Roland
code was performed.


My battery is new and still good (3.7v) and no boot to Roland code was performed, anybody experience similar problems? It's pretty annoying because the JP-6 resets every time after the E-4 boot code and forgets last panel settings.
Old 18th February 2019
  #509
Lives for gear
 
Fuseball's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arnoid View Post
-Sometimes when booting I get code E-4? If I look in the europa manual it says this:
Bad Europa board settings found and defaults loaded. Europa uses part of the NVRAM
for storing current board state and settings. This code is shown when the area contains
bad/bogus settings. This failure can also be shown when the board is first powered up
after Europa is installed, the controller board’s battery is failing, or if a boot to the Roland
code was performed.


My battery is new and still good (3.7v) and no boot to Roland code was performed, anybody experience similar problems? It's pretty annoying because the JP-6 resets every time after the E-4 boot code and forgets last panel settings.
I get *exactly* the same E-4 boot behaviour sometimes. I don't think I've ever gotten to the bottom of exactly why it happens. I think it might have something to do with saving patches, as I only appear to get it after I've done that and rebooted.

In practice, the only thing it forces me to change every time is the MIDI channel, so I find it only mildly annoying.
Old 15th April 2019
  #510
Lives for gear
 
usedtohaveajuno's Avatar
One thing doesn't seem possible - any way at all to synchronise the LFO speed to the ARP speed (or ARP trigger in my case).

I'd love to do an ARP sequence with a random LFO applied to the filter, so every single note gets it's own filter level. If they aren't synchronised, it sounds rubbish.

This is easy with the 101 as the random LFO locks to the trigger, but seems impossible on the Jupiter, which I know has software LFOs.

It frustrates me there are 3 different modulation speeds for the main LFO, the arp clock and LFO-2 ....

Am I missing a trick? [don't say "Europa" or "just match the LFO speed manually to the speed of your arp clock" ]

I guess another way would be to use a Kenton Pro-2 or similar to drive the VCF input CV from velocity in the DAW or something, but I don't have a Pro-2 anymore and I am driving the ARP from the 808/909 trigger anyway!

Last edited by usedtohaveajuno; 15th April 2019 at 02:30 PM.. Reason: EDIT: Jupiter-7
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
jomo1234 / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
5
beesting / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
11
claudemorrow / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
2
musicmind11 / So Much Gear, So Little Time
23
waveterm / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
2

Forum Jump
Forum Jump