Roland Juno-106 vs D-50

A forum for comparing two or more synths against each other. Also known as "versus" threads.

Re: Roland Juno-106 vs D-50

Postby philip » Tue Sep 03, 2013 4:37 pm

Nothing can beat 106...nothing
User avatar
philip
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 6:52 pm
Real name: Philip

Advertisement:

Re: Roland Juno-106 vs D-50

Postby Sir Ruff » Fri Sep 06, 2013 2:32 pm

philip wrote:Nothing can beat 106...nothing

:lol:
Do you even post on vse bro?
User avatar
Sir Ruff
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
 
Posts: 3333
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 11:55 pm
Location: Synthinnati
Gear: Two persimmon modulators and a frequency adjudicator.
Band: Ruff in the jungle

Re: Roland Juno-106 vs D-50

Postby philip » Sat Sep 07, 2013 1:37 am

Sir Ruff wrote:
philip wrote:Nothing can beat 106...nothing

:lol:


:lol:
User avatar
philip
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 6:52 pm
Real name: Philip

Re: Roland Juno-106 vs D-50

Postby Bitexion » Wed Sep 11, 2013 10:36 pm

I've owned both.

A D-50 is like having 4 individual 1 oscillator polysynths under the same hood. Each part can do it's own thing, be it playing a filtered "analog" waveform, or play a PCM sample (can't filter the samples for some reason). The samples range from small attack portions of real instruments like the "chiff" of a brass instrument, that you can layer with a subtractive synthesized brass sound to make it sound more realistic. There's also lots of various full waveform samples of hammond organ with various drawbar settings that you can mix together into really complex hammond sounds.

It's a super versatile and good sounding synth, but can be really hard to get into. The manual is actually helpful, kind of opposite to Roland's reputation of having useless user manuals. It also has a nice effects section that gives you your basic reverbs, delays (various time settings) and chorus.

The Juno is very hands-on and almost impossible to make a bad sound with. But it is quite limited since it doesn't have a ton of synth features, like just one oscillator, shared filter/amp envelope. You can mix together the saw and pulse waveforms though. Plus a very useful suboscillator that can add serious weight to a strings sound. The whole synth is a huge sweet spot basically, with or without the chorus enabled. When you set the suboscillator at a certain spot, the sawtooth turns into something like an "uber sawtooth" one octave lower, it drowns out the original waveform, seriosly thick sound. The subosc is really a square wave, but when they're mixed just right it sounds like a very thick sawtooth one octave lower than the original note.
User avatar
Bitexion
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
 
Posts: 3452
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:43 pm
Location: Drammen, Norway
Gear: Alesis Andromeda A6
Roland D-50
Yamaha Motif XF6
Roland Gaia
Alesis Ion
Analogue Systems modular
+various assorted bits&bobs

Re: Roland Juno-106 vs D-50

Postby Kenneth » Wed Sep 11, 2013 11:24 pm

philip wrote:
Sir Ruff wrote:
philip wrote:Nothing can beat 106...nothing

:lol:


:lol:

Come on you two. Everything anyone ever posts on here is subjective, you know that. Don't laugh at someone else's opinion.
User avatar
Kenneth
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 286
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2011 12:57 am
Location: Minnesota
Real name: Kenneth
Gear: Voyager. Microbrute. Monotron. Monotron Duo. Monotribe. Dark Time. Casiotone 405
Band: Glacier Academy

Re: Roland Juno-106 vs D-50

Postby Kenneth » Wed Sep 11, 2013 11:28 pm

Bitexion wrote:I've owned both.

A D-50 is like having 4 individual 1 oscillator polysynths under the same hood. Each part can do it's own thing, be it playing a filtered "analog" waveform, or play a PCM sample (can't filter the samples for some reason). The samples range from small attack portions of real instruments like the "chiff" of a brass instrument, that you can layer with a subtractive synthesized brass sound to make it sound more realistic. There's also lots of various full waveform samples of hammond organ with various drawbar settings that you can mix together into really complex hammond sounds.

It's a super versatile and good sounding synth, but can be really hard to get into. The manual is actually helpful, kind of opposite to Roland's reputation of having useless user manuals. It also has a nice effects section that gives you your basic reverbs, delays (various time settings) and chorus.

The Juno is very hands-on and almost impossible to make a bad sound with. But it is quite limited since it doesn't have a ton of synth features, like just one oscillator, shared filter/amp envelope. You can mix together the saw and pulse waveforms though. Plus a very useful suboscillator that can add serious weight to a strings sound. The whole synth is a huge sweet spot basically, with or without the chorus enabled. When you set the suboscillator at a certain spot, the sawtooth turns into something like an "uber sawtooth" one octave lower, it drowns out the original waveform, seriosly thick sound. The subosc is really a square wave, but when they're mixed just right it sounds like a very thick sawtooth one octave lower than the original note.

Awesome comparison, thanks for the info! I've been getting more interested in various forms of digital synthesis, and the D50 seems like very in depth machine. I don't really see any similarities between in and the Juno, but they would most likely compliment each other well.
User avatar
Kenneth
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 286
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2011 12:57 am
Location: Minnesota
Real name: Kenneth
Gear: Voyager. Microbrute. Monotron. Monotron Duo. Monotribe. Dark Time. Casiotone 405
Band: Glacier Academy

Re: Roland Juno-106 vs D-50

Postby Bitexion » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:11 am

-double post forum is weird today-
Last edited by Bitexion on Thu Sep 12, 2013 4:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Bitexion
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
 
Posts: 3452
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:43 pm
Location: Drammen, Norway
Gear: Alesis Andromeda A6
Roland D-50
Yamaha Motif XF6
Roland Gaia
Alesis Ion
Analogue Systems modular
+various assorted bits&bobs

Re: Roland Juno-106 vs D-50

Postby Bitexion » Thu Sep 12, 2013 12:18 am

There are no real similarities, all the D50 programming is done in menus with multiple pages. But at least you have a joystick to use as data edit. And the panel is full of shortcuts to various sections of each individual part, so you can move around pretty quickly once you get to know it.

You can get close to the Juno sound though, the D50 has sawtooth and pulse/square waves on the analog part of its oscillators, plus a digital chorus effect, though not the same as the Juno one. The sawtooth isn't really shaped as a sawtooth, more like a shark fin, so it sounds bigger than a normal sawtooth. Not so "thin", more blaring in a way.

The D-50 was in fact the first synth to have a fully equipped effects section. Reverbs, lots of delays (even though you can't adjust the timing), chorus. It was indeed Roland's flagship synthesizer back in 1987.
User avatar
Bitexion
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
 
Posts: 3452
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:43 pm
Location: Drammen, Norway
Gear: Alesis Andromeda A6
Roland D-50
Yamaha Motif XF6
Roland Gaia
Alesis Ion
Analogue Systems modular
+various assorted bits&bobs

Re: Roland Juno-106 vs D-50

Postby DP75 » Mon Sep 16, 2013 6:18 pm

Some random sounds on my Juno-106.

Watch on youtube.com


Cheers,
DP75
DP75
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 2:12 pm

Re: Roland Juno-106 vs D-50

Postby Swayze » Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:38 pm

I'd recommend the Roland JX3P. If you're looking for vintage 70's AND 80's sounds, you'll want to go analog. The 3P will deliver more vintage sounds than the 106 because of it's more traditional architecture. The 3P gives you 2 osc's to work with and has fine tuning to get the classic phase sound. It also includes a mod section and more lfo waveforms. It's filter might not be as brilliant as the 106 but it still has a cool vibe of it's own. It's a solid keyboard and very fun to play. Includes a simple sequencer and if you can find a PG200 for cheap, you can tweak all the parameters on the fly. Overall, it's a great synth to learn subtractive synthesis on and it will deliver those retro analog sounds you're looking for. It's more affordable than the 106 and doesn't have that voice-chip issue as it uses the more reliable chips also found in the Jupiter 8 and Juno 60. Check out some demos on youtube and good luck. Let us know how it goes.
User avatar
Swayze
Junior Member
Junior Member
 
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2013 1:49 am
Location: Reno/Tahoe
Gear: Mono/Poly, Microbrute, AX80, JX3P, VSynth, CZ101, Drumtraks

Re: Roland Juno-106 vs D-50

Postby 8bit9bot » Thu Dec 26, 2013 3:39 am

D-50: if you arent planning on using the digital samples, the synthesis section is still great... but! it cant do a good "arpeggio bass" which is why its not a good analog substitute - also the filter doesnt self oscillate... it's a very pleasant filter but it just "growls" when you turn up the reso - good for sweeps and thick unison leads but nothing with "bouncey" envelopes or smooth bass

the 106 is much better if you like early to mid 80's - or a general "vintage vibe" - 106 unison mode sucks... dont use it for that - both are great! if you can afford a little extra get the Juno-60 instead... the only synth that bounces as nicely as the Jupiter-8 IMO
8bit9bot
No Longer Registered
 

Previous

Return to Synth Shootouts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests