Does the Roland Jupiter-X Really Suck?

[@electriceyeslide5959]

You’re spot on. I actually own the Jupiter-X and opened a ticket with Roland to explain to me the technical details of the OSS. Many “synth snobs” will babble on aimlessly about the superiority of analog VCOs of the Jupiter-8 and how the digital OSS architecture of the Jupiter-X is a joke (just VSTs in a box). Well, that’s not quite accurate. The X/Xm features 4x discreet digital oscillators that can be reproduced by VST, but the true magic happens by way of the X’s purpose built hardware. You can do things simultaneously on the Jupiter-X that would all but crush the most powerful Intel i9s. The clarity of the sound must be heard live to appreciate it. People hear the X through their phones or on computer speakers and think VSTs sound just as good, they don’t. Even on my water-cooled i9 Extreme I built with 128GB of RAM with piano keyboard attached, I simply can’t create the same music as on my X.

[@Bluepulli72]

which DA interface ?

[@electriceyeslide5959]

@@Bluepulli72 What are you asking?

[@Bluepulli72]

@@electriceyeslide5959 sorry i wonder why your vst`s didn`t sound as good, maybe because of your audio interface ? There are huge differences in quality. So i asked what digital/analog interface you have - i own a rme fireface 802 and it reproduces piano sounds with many rams totally natural so it couldn`t be possible that a synth sound (or 4 synth sounds and much more) can`t be reproduce in high clarity - what furthermore doesn`t mean that i´m not very excited about the jupiter x !!! i`m testing the jupiter x and the arturia polybrute this week and hope i can find my favourite synth finally (btw- sorry - english is not my mother language)

[@electriceyeslide5959]

@@kevincrandall2751 Well it’s not a replica of the Jupiter 8, it’s “inspired” by it. Since OS 3 came out, everyone wants one now. They sound so damn good and for the money, it’s one of the best Synth’s on the market. I have one and just love it.

[@masuka666]

Yeah, I agree with my predecessors. I don't intent to criticize hardware unit - which quality is great. But poor sound with clarity issues on PC's VSTes - in my experience too - is the problem driven mostly by bad audio interface quality that people often have. Let's be honest - most of audio interfaces created for the PC are total crap - no matter how many times they use the word PRO somewhere. My (far from perfect, but surprisingly often effective) method of determination if audio interface for PC is worth my attention is to check if it exists (and is popular) also in Mac World. If it is - you can count on, at least, decent quality 😆😁

[@Sashabooboo]

I can't afford a Jupiter 8. This looks like a Jupiter 8. I bought it, primarily because of how it looks, Quality and sonics weren't so much an issue; I knew it would sound better than Casiotone. The Jupiter X is an excellent synth and I'm glad I bought it. I don't have anything against plug-in people, I just prefer to touch the actual instrument as opposed to turning knobs on a computer screen. If it sounds the same, no biggie. It's just preference. Excellent video.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Thanks!

[@Fallingoverbackwards]

Agree completely, Hands on control keyboard even if (under the hood it is VST) is a great experience. Actually, any modern digital synth is the same even of they dont offer as a separate VST. Unless analog is all hardware over a computer dsp or similar

[@ZenMountain]

"I bought it, primarily because of how it looks". Very smart of you, congratulations!!!

[@marmite-land]

Depends on what you want. If you want a sort of hub for vintage synth emulations, if you favor quantity and convenience over what some hardcore old synth fans would call "quality" (let's call it truthfulness), then yes, the Jupiter X is the way to go. If you're on a tight budget but still want the Jupiter sound in true analog format, then why not pick an MKS-80, the least costly of the four Jupiters ? It's kind of an awkward middle ground between the Jupiter 8 and 6 but there's velocity and aftertouch ! Now i consider myself to be a child of science and logic, objectivity is what i strive to achieve in my sayings, but it really seems like vintage synths got something more. Something i can't explain, something i don't know the cause of, and it annoys me to an unreasonable degree, they're more lively. I have the TAL J-8 VST which is a spot-on emulation of the Jupiter 8 of some guy in switzerland who makes these emulations that can rival and even beat Roland's own for a criminally low price (he even did comparaisons with his unit to show that yes, it sounds exactly the same) and a Jupiter 6, which has the same kind of sound as the 8, except maybe at high resonance values. Well, TAL J-8 sounds very very nice, i have lots of fun designing sounds with it, but the real hardware beats it in warmth. I don't know how, i don't know why, its sound is just more live. You do have the sensation what you're listening to is current modulated by wires and resistors, capacitors, OP-amps and ICs, the Jupiter sound is inherently very space-sounding, dreamy hi-fi. I don't know if you get that kind of feeling with an emulation. I would very much like to be able to play both next to each other to make my own opinion, cause every comparaison video is just rushed and the sounds each unit makes is noticeably different when it really shouldn't. I'd put time and effort into pulling out the EXACT same patch on both to judge truthfully.

[@0072gldnfngr]

Man. It is freaking beautiful.

[@RobertSaintJohn]

Thanks so much for letting me be a part of this great video and retort! Looking forward to more of your synth videos.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Thanks Robert!

[@FakeGlasses]

The problem is the price point. It is not a paperweight, it will make good sounds. But $2.4K for a digital synth (no analog filter or anything), no knob per function and a sub par screen/interface, means there a better options for most potential buyers. Your own zen core comparison video addresses this. For that price you could have several Hifi analog and hybrid synths (polybrute., p6, super 6, rev2, prologue, ob6, summit, etc.) and some with $1k to spare, or a system 8 for $1k less or used boutiques etc. You could also get a real Juno 106 or an alpha Juno and jx8p etc for that price. You could also buy a midi controller, interface, music computer, DAW, and similar vsts or Roland cloud for that price, etc. And if the price isn’t a problem, given you aren’t getting knob per function anyway, why not get the fantom instead? I had my personal issues with the interface, filter, I-arp etc. If the X was 1-1.5k and the Xm was 500-800 I think they’d be much more appealing purchases. I personally returned my Xm and got a Super 6. Just my two cents.

[@floridahiker1503]

People just get the system thats right for them whether it be used or new analog or digital hardware or a controller with a daw or acoustic. People like the Roland sound so it will always be popular even if it costs more.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

It's for sure, expensive. Really expensive. But I still really like it.

[@Plastic_Ivory]

Getting mine in a week and a half! Very excited. Been waiting a YEAR!

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Nice congrats and enjoy it!

[@Marcoosianism]

Hope you're enjoying your new toy! Last Roland I bought was in 1985 and I have no clue what I would buy today. So much has changed.

[@Plastic_Ivory]

@@Marcoosianism 1985 is my lucky year!

[@Marcoosianism]

@@Plastic_Ivory Oh sweeet ! Some nice analog stuff back then. Hope I can find similar gear when I start looking :-)

[@GregFrankly]

Loved the video! I had watched the review you mentioned and remember having many of the same thoughts you present here. Also, your quality is exceptional for being your only video on KZbin. Hope to see more from you in the future!

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Thanks Greg. This is my first "synth/music gear" related video but I have another channel where I review wrist watches for the past 4 years. So not my first time doing a KZbin video.

[@mepenguin]

Great video! I disagree on the speakers though. Sometimes I just want to play without starting all the gear up, and after 6-8 hours of zoom meetings I really don't want to put headphones on. Perhaps special times, but I do appreciate having 1 synth with built in speakers. Convenient it is the most awesome of my synths too.

[@darwiniandude]

The speakers are why I’m buying an Xm. I want something I can use, as well as the kids. Battery operation and speakers are table stakes. A real synth, not a Casio. Only three products exist; Reface CS, Microkorg S, Jupiter Xm. Korg has the best speakers, good bass, but distorts and a little muffled. Better speakers than the Xm though. The Xm speakers are better than the Reface CS. The display on the Xm makes visualising ADSR curves for example much better than the knob based text matrix on Microkorg. Yamaha is the most straightforward, but the most limited. Jupiter wins this specific use case handily.

[@0072gldnfngr]

I appreciate this honest review. I read and seen a ton of reviews like the one you’re referencing here, before I bought the Jupiter X. I’m glad I was able to see thru the internet and analog synth purists rage and just purchased it because I wanted it. Very pleased with it.

[@chrismitchell3283]

I've had my JP-X for 14 months and love it. The recent rev.3 update with JP-X model (a no-brainer) has really sealed the deal. As a long time JP-6 user I'm hoping that model will be added soon...The JP-6 has a unique sound unlike the other JP's, so it will be interesting to hear what they come up with.

[@DGShackleford]

100% agreed. I had a JP-6 before the prices absolutely skyrocketed, and while I enjoyed it and sometimes miss it, I don’t miss the sound enough to pay what they’re going for now. I’d love for it to get added to the JP-X. I’m probably a bad Jupiter-X owner, though, because I rarely use anything other than the Jupiter-8 model on mine and I still feel it’s worth every single penny.

[@Howdy606]

Great vid. I have one. It's a spectacular synth. I agree it can be a little confusing from the start but once you understand how it functions , it shines. Reading forums and comments I see a lot of System 8 owners who obviously didn't want to like this synth from the start, and picking at it in any negative way they could. I have used both and prefer the X. (I used to own a Jupiter 8 and the JPX gave me the sound and feel I remembered).

[@arcadeaudio1979]

That's awesome that you feel it compares so well to the JP-8. I think it's pretty great, even with some of the short comings.

[@Howdy606]

@@arcadeaudio1979 Well standing behind a JPX, playing those rich Jupiter pads took me right back to the 80's. Never felt that with the System 8. Supposed slightly higher spec doesn't automatically make it better. Also being able to layer a Jupiter 8/Juno 106/JX8P with notes to spare is a luxury not to be missed. I now understand why the S8 is green. ;)

[@NikitaMusique]

@@Howdy606 why is it green ?

[@Howdy606]

@@NikitaMusique with envy......

[@oddjobzombie]

I only have the Xm, but one thing I've noticed is that if using any of the classic models the front panel controls are super easy to use for sound design. Attempting to create a complex zen-core sound from scratch is a little obnoxious but I find myself using those tones as presets more than anything and editing the most important elements, cutoff, envelopes, etc. to get a tone where I want it is still dead simple. Great video, thanks!

[@arcadeaudio1979]

I agree using the front panel for the Jupiter and Juno models is pretty straight forward and I can get the majority of my sound design tasks done with just that. And I'm like you, for the complex zen sounds, I am more of a preset user with little tweaks to filters or envelopes and that's about it, which works 99% of the time just fine.

[@oddjobzombie]

@@arcadeaudio1979 A welcome improvement on the "preset-surfing" end of things would be more robust tags instead of banks/categories (which seems unlikely) OR a search feature. Not all of the presets are named descriptively but I like the wavetable sounds found in the presets with "Digi" in their name and it'd be cool to narrow down my selection.

[@davegill7614]

How do you even play the tiny keys?

[@oddjobzombie]

@@davegill7614 I have and have had a few synths with different key sizes and you just adapt. But I usually play the Xm via a larger MIDI controller. I like having such a powerful portable synth to use with headphones, even if the minikeys lack aftertouch.

[@davegill7614]

@@oddjobzombie Hi Brandon this is a subject I know very little about....so can you connect say an 88 key...keyboard to the Xm and use it that way??

[@peterldelong]

Hey Roland, little guy Sequential was able to release a rev 4 Prophet, I bought the P10 and it’s amazing. This is my third Prophet, first one purchased in 1979 brand new. Build a Jupiter 8 and they will come, even if it’s $5K. I’ll buy it. I’ve kept my 106, Super JX, D50, JD-800, R8 and XV-5080’s for a reason. There’s not one piece of new Roland gear I’d buy now and that makes me sad.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

That's quite a collection!

[@mr.spongylikeaboss4987]

I had the Rev2 and thought it was utter shite. Deepmind 12 was more useful to me, but even that was limited. In the end bought a Kronos 2, and enjoy the workstations more.

[@littleHIV]

What I love about the Jupiter X is, that you have almost no Visual Interface, except the little one on the side. I love the design (Jupiter 8 / Juno 60), that you have alle the faders. I really don't like jupming through a lot of menues to tinker with the sound. So great design, you got basically all the legendary sounds from the 80s & 90s and it doesn't cost 30000€ and the souls of your kids to get one. :D

[@Charlyaraya]

I had the Juno X and after the frustration of the menu diving along other issues I ended returning it, does the Jx have ban menu diving as well ?

[@The_Bit_Player]

It's a Roland. Of course it sucks. Then 20 years later when everybody figures it out, it's amazing and worth a fortune.

[@mchockney3664]

Why is the scene offset not the standard while shaping your scene with the sliders and knobs?! Separate saving of edited tones should be an option, not mandatory! What an afterthought!!

[@JiveTalker78]

I totally get some people not digging the Jupiter X, everyone has their own tastes and what they want out of a synth. As for me, I really love what I hear from this instrument and definitely plan on making a trip to the music store to tickle the keys on this baby to see how she handles in person.

[@zelbarnap]

Maybe it’s the KZbin compression, but there’s a lack of punch

[@nigelcassidy9880]

I am finding the sound programming a challenge. Would really appreciate a button by button tutorial for programming a tone from an init patch. Nothing on KZbin yet that really helps.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Thanks for the idea! I'll see if I can do something like that. It's hard because either the camera would be zoomed out enough to see the whole keyboard and seeing individual controls would be difficult, or I'd have to spend a tone of time moving the camera around... I'll see what I can think of.

[@jcchaconjr]

As this synth costs $2899 and with the since released Juno-X costing $1999, I guess it begs the question, is the Jupiter worth the Premium considering that a Jupiter-8 Model Expansion is available for the Juno?

[@arcadeaudio1979]

I own both now and the keybed on the Jupiter is a lot nicer but I'm not sure it's really "worth" the price difference. I guess it depends on how much you value the feel of the keys. Other than that maybe if you prefer the proprietary sound engine in the Jupiter-X over the Juno-X and it's proprietary engine?

[@0x80O0oOverfl0w]

I think internal speakers make a lot of sense for small portable gear like the Keystep or MPC, but this is obviously not small or even remotely portable.... so it's logical to assume that you're going to have speakers wherever this is set up and thus no need for internal speakers.

[@keybert6932]

You got an inviting VOICE .. Good JOB

[@jupitermarx]

I have come to realize, synth fandom is very similar if not the same as “Star Wars” fans! No one hates on, like fanatical fans!

[@AaronSmithExperience]

This is a great video. Ive owned the Jupiter X for over a year and the sounds I get from it are unmatched. I absolutely love this keyboard!! It takes a little time to get used to maneuvering through it, but once you get the hang of it, it is a synth that's worth having in the collection. Great Video bro! I was VERY disappointed in the video you addressed when he first came out with it. I could clearly tell he did not truly spend time with this synth at all.

[@MUFSpoiler]

owned ???

[@JT-jd5xs]

I think the Jupiter X is really good. Tried one at Guitar Center and it passed the sniff test with me. Plain and simple. I was getting the 80's beats Im always after then adding bass lines ect. real quick to great effect. I love the automatic riffs and patterns it generates. I was very confident in it's sound and build quality. Ive spent many hours in front of a Juno 106/ 60 Prophets ect The sound quality is ultra professional in my opinion, but at the same time pleasing/ musical. That kind of sums up the Roland sound when it's right. I like that you really don't need a band with this. Maybe a singer, an instrument or two and your good to go.

[@alexandrosroussos]

Thx for the video, I’ve learned to love my XM although I’ve never been fan of the complicated Part/Model/OSC/Scene/Function selection workflow which is based on the same buttons. Fact is, as you say, that it sounds absolutely amazing, all that in a fully featured compact package. Capability to expand with new models (they recently released the JD800 model for it) is another reason why I believe I will have hard time to decide to sell this synth anytime soon :-)

[@MrCshmn]

I hated mine until I ditched the I-arp and just use it as a multi timbre instrument. I was going to sell it. Luckily my Squarp pyramid replaces the I-Arp.

[@lukaskrahn6120]

The Jupiter-X was the first synth I've ever played, and so it has pretty much set my preferences.

[@paulmccabe2859]

Thank you for the video, Guy; it was informative! Concerning the ZEN-Core engine, I can assure that this is not in any way a repackaging of previous technology; it truly is an all-new platform. Concerning the integrated amplification, your view is appreciated, and we have had many owners both hobbyist and professional really appreciate this feature for its immediacy and convenience.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Hey Paul thanks for checking in. And thanks for the info about the ZEN-Core engine. Like I said, I REALLY didn't think it was a rehash of old engine like the guy from the video I made reference to suggests. But, being as I didn't have first hand knowledge I didn't want to make a definitive statement. Glad to get some official input on that. Regarding the internal speakers, I can see why some might like them. They're not terrible, but if it were up to me I'd rather just omit them and cut the price of the keyboard down a few more bucks!

[@IanAlderige]

Can the internal speakers be muted? Sound bleeding into my microphone would be a concern. Thanks.

[@djangofett4879]

Is it not just a further refinement of the SuperNatural engine? which in itself was an evolution of the engine that goes back to the Jv and Xv series? It builds on previous tech, but it is the newest and best version.

[@paulmccabe2859]

@@djangofett4879 Thanks for the comment- no, it is a new and different synthesis system. The core processor that ZEN-Core runs on (when appearing in hardware instruments) is also basically capable of hosting SuperNatural, but the firmware is quite different.

[@OlavSFlaa]

Great video! People who make statements like "synth X sucks" are not worth listening to. Sound, layout, menus, workflow etc is to a large extent about personal preferences. It is also essential in what context you are going to use the synth. I sold my Sequential Prophet 6 and bought a Roland Fantom 6. I guess a lot of people think this is a ridiculous thing to do, but the Fantom suits my needs perfectly.

[@Sam_Utah]

I saw that negative review and still bought a JX because it sounds terrific. I was so frustrated by the "deep learning curve" and little non-touch screen I traded it for a Kronos 2. I will probably get an XM though for the sounds but not until there is some kind of librarian/app released so my 70yo eyes can see things on the big screen like I do with Deepmind and Wavestate librarians. I did find the drum sounds outstanding but programming them tedious, as you say, the curve is steep. It is a premium synth and targeted to younger digital natives rather that very old school hobby studio players like me. However, these new Jupiters include a great Zen Core synth and you can have the greatest hits of Roland Synths on board.... RD, SH, Jupiter, Juno, JX, Integra like libraries... and it sounds luscious. I will get an XM for footprint in my small studio. Sub.

[@synthartist69]

Great video. I love my X. It's a keeper

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Glad you liked it thanks.

[@godzil42]

About the internal speaker of the JX, how do they compare with the JXM? I found the one in the XM (which make more sense I agree to have them in a portable keyboard) to be reasonably good for the size of the whole synth, and not tiny or lacking of bass, they are probably part of the best I ever had in any gear (with speakers)

[@user-dn8rz3lw9e]

I recently got a Juno X. I think this sounds a little better but they probably sound very similar. It's certainly easier to look at than this thing. IMO.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

I own both, they sound the same. The Jupiter has a bit nicer of a keyboard but the Juno is great and the sounds are exactly the same with the exception of the one proprietary sound engine each keyboard has.

[@MIDERA]

I felt his biggest criticism was pretty well taken, I’ve watched a few videos (Kebu just made a video using it) and watching him spend half the time with the little screen on the side just leaves me baffled. Obviously, I haven’t played one in person, but that placement just doesn’t make any sense to me - you mentioned this criticism but sorta just glossed over it as a disagreement... I’d like to know more about it - Kebu had to edit the JX8P oscillators, like pitch, shape, etc, in that little menu. It looked awful for programming. I guess I need to check out a video where they make patches from start to finish and see how good/bad the workflow seems. I have a system 8 and it’s got a great workflow. I don’t really like it’s keybed though. Seems like the Jupiter X wins on that one. The Starsky comparison made the S8 sound a bit better than the Jupiter Xm, but mostly for someone like me, I’d rather have a synth do one thing well than 50 things ok... A shame he got rid of his original video, I thought it was good and honestly having points and counterpoints are nice to see.

[@jfphotoandlife8287]

You have to buy the Jupiter-X knowingly. If you want 40 years of Roland sounds this is for you. If you want to practice and create your own sounds, then go your way.

[@Fallingoverbackwards]

Subscribed !! Please make more review videos, in particular I would like a more in depth look at the Jupiter X. It seems to me everyone was mad because Roland did not produce an analog Jupiter 8 reissue, unlike Korg creating reissues. This synth did not get a fair shake

[@arcadeaudio1979]

I appreciate that!

[@scavenom2008]

Honestly the synth does sound thin. For those who understand you know what I mean

[@audreyazwell]

I couldn't agree more.

[@MarkGardner66Bonnie]

Thank you for your honest opinion. I plan on purchasing a Jupiter soon and am diving into KZbin videos to compare the X vs the Xm. A $1,000 is a lot for just a keybed but I am leaning to that as mini keys have not been good to me in the past.

[@loellamarre6821]

I've heard nothing but good things about this synth. People that will throw shade towards it may have their reasons.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Yeah it's pretty great overall. I still have mine and I even bought a Juno-X.

[@187onasimp]

I feel out my chair laughing when talked about the Deepmind keybed vs. the Jupiter X. The Deepmind Keybed feels like macaroni noodles. It's so cheap and soft. I'd rather press down on broken glass shards than a Behringer Keybed. It's one of the reasons I dumped my Deepmind.

[@irife2771]

Everybody wants the real thing until it stops powering up or fails to tune.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

truth

[@biggrime]

Facts or the repair bill

[@irife2771]

@@biggrime I sent my OBXa in early last year to have ONE voice board fixed and a few keyboard wires and it ended up at around $1500 by the time it was done

[@biggrime]

@@irife2771 whoa!! That's not cheap at all.

[@midnightsocean2689]

would be nice if you had included a link to the video you speak of, so we could judge for ourselves.

[@mauchkimberly]

Also, I heard a guy do a side by side comparison between the xa, sys. 8 and the x, next to the jupiter (I don't remember the other models he compared). They each sounded quite different from one another in that comparison. None was bad. Just different. But the sys. 8 sounded most like it in strict sound. The x had comparable feel with things like the filter sweeps, etc. All were nice, but each was different. And the x has different "behavior" to the others, which is one of the marketing points for it. As I understand it, the change between the sys 8 and the X allows way more storage space for sounds in the X, than could be possible in the sys. 8.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Ya, different isn't a bad thing. Different can still be good right?

[@tommymandel3326]

Love your video work, thank you! Three things in the middle of this one jumped out at me as respondable though, so here I go: 1. Calling a software instrument a VI in a box is fair. But when you have the Box itself, you might expect something extra. Sure, the knobs and sliders mostly. But what I notice when I compare Cloud JD-800 to real one, and to a certain extent Cloud D-50 to real one, is that something in the output stage of the hardware boxes changes their sound into what makes them unique. Yes, one can boost frequencies on their software counterparts, but it doesn't result in the same impact. 2. In another vid I watched today, perhaps your other great one, the host compared Roland's new ABM engine to their older ACB one, and mentioned that the old one may sound a little better but the new one saves resources. Point made. 3. This may stray into philosophy, sorry if it does, but being able to swap patches between platforms really only means that the different 'synths' are really the same platform. fire away! - ps. the last Roland I bought was a Jupiter 80, which I do love. It took me years to buy one and the Jupiter-X is too close in look and features to justify getting, although you make it sound great! I do have a D-50 and a 550, and the amazing V-Synth (1), and the JD-800 here came from someone who couldn't pay me for some sessions! XV-88 sounds and feels amazing (when the old keys aren't breaking) and I guess that's my Precambrian Fantom.... JP8080 stays on a bass patch that reminds me of one that Mutt Lange and his programmer, "Crash" used to use. . . so I do dig Roland. If I had the space and the scratch, I'd get a Jupiter-X. I still miss the Juno-60 I sold, but only a little. And I'm not sure whether to renew my Roland Cloud professional subscription when it expires, because I'm sticking with an older MacOS and one by one, their new emulations stop being supported.

[@geoffk777]

I think that the Jupiter X is a very competitive synth and would be nice for someone who wants a single, inexpensive board with a range of old analog and new digital sounds. But, honestly, if you have Zenology Pro on your PC, than you don't really need it. It might be nice to get one and be able to swap between PC and hardware almost seamlessly. But, for me, if I have to buy hardware, I want it to be something unique, that I can't easily replace with a VST.

[@MUFSpoiler]

and how do you play `?

[@geoffk777]

@@MUFSpoiler How do you play a VST? Just get a USB keyboard and plug it into your computer. Or, if you're old school, get a USB to MIDI interface and connect the MIDI. It's easy.

[@MUFSpoiler]

@@geoffk777 good idea, but which keyboard?

[@geoffk777]

@@MUFSpoiler Any keyboard will work, as nearly all keyboards have USB and/or MIDI. You can get a very inexpensive MIDI controller keyboard that doesn't make any internal sounds. Or you can use any synth with a keyboard as your controller. There are lots of KZbin videos on using computers as musical instruments, so they'll explain how to connect everything.

[@MaximilianoSchneider]

Great video! I like that you were completely honest about the synth. I saw a couple of weeks ago the other video, while looking reviews about the X (I'm gonna buy it for my upcoming birthday) and clearly that guy for some reason, hates the Jupiter X and he's so blind that won't give a honest review. It's a digital synth and has a ton on flexibility thanks to that. DX7 and M1 today are a VST in a box as well, and for sure the VST versions has more modern upgrades, but that doesn't make those synth a VST in a box. I love both analog and digital synth but I wouldn't blame them because they're so different. The experimental side on an analog synth is amazing, but a digital one is so flexible that makes your workflow way more easy. Funny thing is than on most of the reviews, the Jupiter X and Xm have a pretty high score. Maybe is not a synth for everyone, but happens with every synth, car, phone, etc. I think when he talks about the old technology Roland is rebranding is the ACB used in the Aira line and the Boutiques. The Jupiter and Phantom uses the ABM and is not exactly the same thing. Yes both are simulating analog behaviors but the 1st one ir more CPU stressing and that limits polyphony and so many other things. That's why even when the boutique line is truly amazing (I have 6 of them), they have limitations. The ABM technology instead, is better to handle more poliphony and the results are pretty much the same. Some people say that if the ACB can replicate a Juno or Jupiter or any Roland Analog Synth/Drum Machine almost at a 99%, the ABM does the same at a 98% probably. Thanks for the video!

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Hope you enjoy the JP-X when you get it. I'll probably post some more videos with mine in the coming days and weeks so keep an eye out.

[@kylekemp4776]

I bought a Jupiter X used for $2k. It brings me joy.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Nice congrats!

[@franklinhart2056]

Jupiter X is a beast. Everybody's needs are different!

[@ohheyitskevinc]

Good video, cheers! That other one was just complaints for the sake of complaints and clicks. My only thing is - I wish Roland had doubled down on ACB for the Jupiter X and Juno X rather than go down the Zencore path. It just somehow sounds more authentic. They hit it out the park with the System 8 (and for 2017 was probably too good and ahead of its time) and instead of building on that - they just went off down another road I don’t think they needed to. I own both and think a System 8 inside this chassis with this keybed and poly aftertouch, more memory and CPU (and less green) and they’d sell. I do love both, but find myself going back to the System 8 and using the Jupiter X as the controller. Strange I know, but that’s me :) If the System 8 hadn’t happened - I would be very happy with the X though.

[@sjfarrell2.03]

Sounds amazing. Closest I will get is Zenology Cloud but I think that sounds amazing too.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

No shame in that, Zenology Cloud is great. Discussed that topic in a subsequent video here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/m5uVopqXd96qo9E

[@ChrisP3000x]

1) Did Digiphex take down their review? 2) What is the purpose of the center display? Why not put the screen there?

[@jPaulofe]

Thanks for your very clear video on the mighty Jupiter-X! Keep them coming A side comment about the Deepmind...I had a Behringer Deepmind6 for some time and there were two things that bothered me a lot... 1- The time it took to estabilize when changing patches, and 2- The noisy keyboard when playing with some force/speed...

[@spazkong]

This video helps me see what Roland are doing. They are archiving their entire back catalogue of synths and drum machines with modern, ground breaking (incomplete firmware) technology, ready to drive forward with new mind blowing innovation. They're consolidating and tidying up first.

[@marmite-land]

What do you mean by "entire" ?

[@spazkong]

@@marmite-land I used the term "entire" loosely. I really mean, all of their most notable milestone innovations.

[@GAMERDEV]

I feel moderately misled in marketing of the instrument although. I’m really glad you straightened up my afterthoughts on that video you had referenced. I had seen the video very early after I had purchased my Jupiter X. It led me to look at my unit sideways for a few days, and i set out to dismiss the claims and justify the instrument. Slightly pitiful, but i learned a lot. Beware of bias! Yeah, that keyboard comparison had no control statement, pure bias. The unit; I do see how the hardware form factor & interfacing, front/back panel decisions may have been predicated on the consideration of the X/xm pair functionality and means for a fit market placement, and to integrate all ‘preloaded models’ (vintage models) into the master interface. I just feel they didn’t tell the whole truth of the instrument, but there just isn’t so much out there to justify much. There may be a few sour crumbs around other places of the kit, but overall let me say, it’s a solid average instrument to function on one synth part. That is, synth programmability on one model 70%, C grade at the least. Factor in 3 more parts of any model, rhythm part, arp & sequencer functionality, FX, menu tidbits, and full I/O potential, (did i miss anything?), what you can get with external gear, it’s a B+ (if i’m being a stickler) A grade, I can’t say A+. It’s - 9/10 it’s very practical!!! I’m sure if you’re considering this for your arsenal you’ve already told yourself it’ll get you just about all the way around the roland domain. I feel they’re in the ballpark on the essence of the ambitions they aspired. Seems possibly the ‘synth culmination’ of an ideology of harnessing the pillars of their traditional synthesis generation/family, to put in some few big words.. but my one nitpick may be resolution, please take it for a spin and see for yourself. It isn’t terrible at all, but maybe a tad incremental on some parameters there is no noticeable stepping at all, let me say foremost. It functions well, but of 1023 steps, it often moves in increments of 4-5 From what I find, even finely finessing-ely inching faders/pots still results in increments, usually of 4. I own a moog one, and precision on both is a nitpick, but the one implements a shift function for the center screen GUI resolution precision. A decent workaround. That’s the extent of resolution problems. Mixer levels, amplification, and FX sends are all of 127, but justifiably. As for JP-X, I have one node to touch on for the rhythm part, the drum programmability is there, but basic. Tubing, & detune, though re-trig necessary for pitch retune, and envelopes are finicky as well. You get limited filter operations, but can get innovative with FX. I’ll leave you to explore the rest. If you don’t own, the drums are quality as heck, and sound real as all, great dynamic range, from TR, CR, studio kits, genre specifics, it’s a good time in there. Then program a groove! Lastly, my observations of markets opinions, that of the people, lead me to believe that the next & last truly Important problem/complaint to address on the ‘jupiter problem pecking order’ is that of the menu. You made a great, articulate explanation, but i’d just like to make a point. The menu is modestly finicky, but works well for it’s form factor and interfacing potential presented. When you learn the OS & menu layout it becomes less mind intensive, you begin to know what you’re looking for and intuitively know where to go. Thank you for your humility & time bearing with some off the top, candid but humorous, mashed together thoughts & literacy from a passionate synth fellow! The learning curve is there, but with some dedication, you’ll know just how to operate your Roland Jupiter-X!

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Thanks for watching, and for sharing your thoughts.

[@epicon6]

I wouldn't call it a VST in a box because an original Jupiter-8 costs 35 000$ and needs additional cash for regular servicing and the Jupiter-X is much more affortable and sounds 95-99.9% the same as the original. Also the Jupiter-X has a niche market because it's for those who want a full hands on Jupiter experience creating sounds with knob per function style, so anyone who doesn't understand the value of it, is of course going to slam it and give it a bad review.

[@tuneunleashed]

It doesn’t sound the same as the original…like at all..have you even tried a real one?

[@vaiman7777]

@@tuneunleashed Strange, KZbin comparison of an actual J8 owner disagrees with you. Weird, an owner hears different to random guy who doesn’t own an original. Yeah

[@dancarter5595]

There's a good chance that a lot of the algorithms are the same as older models, but the architecture is definitely new. Just take a look at the oscillator and modulation options in Zenology Pro. It's nothing like previous Roland synths.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Good point, makes sense.

[@mauchkimberly]

I heard a guy do a side by side comparison between the xa, sys. 8 and the x, next to the jupiter (I don't remember the other models he compared). They each sounded quite different from one another in that comparison. None was bad. Just different. But the sys. 8 sounded most like it in strict sound. The x had comparable feel with things like the filter sweeps, etc. All were nice, but each was different.

[@spazkong]

If I had a time machine, I would go back and ensure Vince Clarke lives in every era.

[@SamuraiSnake]

I think you may have just sold me on the Jupiter X: affordable and a beast of a synth.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Thanks for watching!

[@waves7250]

I enjoyed your honesty here. I’ll tell you as a classically trained pianist 95% of synthesiser and keyboard reviews are done by people who can’t even play the instrument. Then they’ll talk about things like Keybed quality with a straight face and it’s actually quite comical.

[@digitaldiezel5870]

Thank you for standing up against idiots who think they know everything! Lol and you countered his points masterfully. There are things I don’t like about this synth but those things don’t make the synth bad, just possibly not for me. It’s a magnificent synth.

[@theguy3174]

it's getting there hey? The internal speakers provide some acoustic feedback along with the clanking key action. Feels quite special.

[@EvilDragon666]

Zen Core IS in fact an amalgam of prior Roland tech, including SuperNatural but also, patches are all the usual 4 tone structures that started with D-50 and improved upon in JV/JD/XV series machines. It's a minor iteration wiith the shiniest new feature exactly being the ability to swap patches with Roland Cloud software - but it's definitely a rename/rebranding.

[@bdresistance612]

Great video!!! How can someone say that is workflow is difficult?? I never learned music, I don't know any keyboard or synth, only tried to Learn guitar a bit and naver made any songs and then I got my Jupiter Xm in November last year and made around 20 tracks with it, few of them with first weeks already. For me seems that it is a great synth for a beginner musician too, this synth is truly inspiring. My music might not be so good for a musicians ears but I had tons of fun with it. Only Roland Jupiter X/Xm made my dream of making music (with cool instrument, not with some pc software) possible. I'm planning to update it to X one day, more keys.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

When doing sound design with the Models (Jupiter, Juno, JX, etc) the workflow is pretty good, but if you want to dive into the Zen engine and make your own tone patches, it's pretty deep. There's a tone of menu diving. That's what most people complain about.

[@dirkkeersmaekers4343]

@@arcadeaudio1979 Make the sounds in Roland Cloud and put it in the X(future)

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Yep that’s what I do for the more complicated stuff.

[@jupitermarx]

I've heard a great explanation of the difference between Zen-core and ABC technology of system one. Some say Roland should have stuck with that original software 🤷 now I understand the differences!

[@patscorneroftheuniverse]

It's all a matter of taste, but these sound really clean and modern, which is something I suspect most people who adore the 80's instruments are not into. I personally love the imperfections and ever so slightly of key and beat arpeggiators and sequencers.

[@gumtree7177]

Did they fix the software bugs with firmware updates?

[@davegill7614]

I am saving up to buy one towards the end of the year it's my dream

[@arcadeaudio1979]

good luck you'll love it

[@davegill7614]

@@arcadeaudio1979 cant do with those little key ones...always dreamed of having a jupiter 8 in the 80s.....its probably the closest I will get

[@tuneunleashed]

Don’t do it just go with Zencore pro it’s the same thing and get the ACB technology for software its more realistic and authentic to the analog tech

[@davegill7614]

@@tuneunleashed is it an actual physical keyboard?

[@arcadeaudio1979]

It's called Zenology Pro, and it's not ACB it's ABM. The ACB technology is found in the legendary plugouts within Roland Cloud, the boutique series of desktop synth modules and the System 8. You're confused on your technology terminology.

[@keekeefries6298]

It’s pretty simple. If you want a Jupiter 8 but don’t want to pay mega bucks for a vintage one, get the Jupiter-X. It IS knob for function for the Jupiter 8 engine. Plus you get all the other features including internal sequencer for 5 tracks and the other engines. Bottom line, if you always wanted a Jupiter 8, this is a much more affordable way to get that experience with all the original knobs, switches, and sliders…

[@troypol343]

The Aftertouch on the Jupiter-X is one thing I am concerned with. I had the Jupiter-80 and it had a great keybed and its aftertouch was very responsive. I was not a fan of the Supernatual synth section tough in the Jupiter-80 and I liked trying to recreate my classic Roland's but is was not good at replicating the Juno-106 and other analog polys I have. SO, I ended up selling the Jupiter-80 and got a System-8. I love the sound and the interface but I wish it was built like the Jupiters also the System-8 lacks aftertouch. When announced, I was excited about the new Jupiter. I bought the smaller Xm when they came out but I was disappointed and quickly returned it. I was disappointed in the user interface which is very convoluted and a bit tedious to program sounds on and setting up parts when not just using the classic synth models. Also, not a big deal but a bit of a pet peeve of mine, I am not sure why Roland put the cable connectors dead center of the Jupiter-X instead of to the left and right. I know if I got a Jupiter-X I would need to get a different stand because I use column stands and it would interfere with the cable placement. Anyway, Since I have the System-8 I actually prefer the ACB tech in it over the ABM found in the models of the Jupiter-X(m) series. There is a difference. The Jupiter-Xs models behave pretty much like other VA synths I have had in the past (V-Synth, SH-201, miniKorg and Alesis Ion) where there is some flanging or phasing of brighter sounds when you have longer releases and play them repeatedly the sound suddenly sounds thin as a result. The System-8 does not do that. The System-8 behaves and sounds much like the originals it's ACB models emulate. Having said that though, I do want a synth that offers more polyphony and the addition of PCM waveforms so the Jupiter-X trumps in that area and why I keep looking back to it. I may revisit the Jupiter-X series again with the larger Jupiter at some point.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Thanks for watching and for the message Troy. Regarding the System-8, I haven't played the physical hardware but I've watched some reviews and seems to sound great, and I've played with the Roland Cloud plugin which sounds very good. That said I do like the polyphony and multi-timbral nature of the JP-X, and overall I'm quite happy with it.

[@darrickkeels6387]

Quality content! Thank you for your contribution to the synth community!

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Glad you enjoy it!

[@tuneunleashed]

Darrick big fan and I suggest you stay away from this awful synth lol

[@darrickkeels6387]

@@tuneunleashed You find it awful? How come?

[@rickhunter6667]

I watch this channel，only because i want to know what watch you wear when you play music.

[@JustBlueFish]

Haha it’s like where’s Waldo for watches.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Thanks for coming over Rick!

[@jgh548]

I have a Kronos which is incredibly powerful and has a horrific learning curve. I also have a D50 which has a terrible learning curve. I used to have a Motif ES which had a pretty dreadful learning curve. I came to the conclusion that professional, powerful musical instruments require patience, effort and persistence to get results from. I don't understand why a real musician wouldn't dedicate the time to learning how to get the best out of their sizeable investment in a tool that allows them huge creative possibilities.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Truth

[@tuneunleashed]

False. The Korg Kronos is not that difficult it’s just very deep that it gets people confused but it’s still much more easier than the Jupiter-X because it allows you a touch screen to get very deep. The Roland Jupiter-X is a very very deep instrument and making the screen that small with many features is a BAD IDEA

[@petercane6376]

Is it better than a Nord stage 3?

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Probably not for piano type sounds.

[@Wizil808]

Thanks for the Jupiter x info good sir. I am considering the Jupiter X. I wanted to watch the Digieffects video that you mentioned (mainly to see them slam the Jupiter's keys and kid glove the other). Alas the video has been made private.

[@thegood9]

Thank you! The ONLY reason I withheld a purchase (i had preordered one long ago) was because of the...INTERNAL SPEAKERS! Nothing says "not for professionals" more than wasting space and money on internal speakers. Dumb reason not to buy, but, it did turn me off. I would REALLY buy a "true" ALL ANALOG "Jupiter" recreation in the Jup 8 body, however, so I wish they would release that. You cannot deny that the Jup X looks AWESOME, and sounds fantastic... Good rebuttal vid. Thank you!

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Thanks Jason.

[@kafkaspen]

So an ARP 2600 was not for professionals ? 😳

[@thegood9]

@@kafkaspen hah, touche....

[@GuitarsAndSynths]

What is the best hardware synth on the market today for trance and house style of electronic music? Also how would you rate the Jupiter X versus the Fantom series? I really like my experience trying out the new Fantom workstation.

[@MrPAULYPOOH]

Re. Internal speakers. I completely agree. They shouldn't have bothered including them. They're a nice addition but unnecessary.

[@brunocordier6335]

A chaque fois que j'utilise ce jupiter X je fais faire un grand voyage,... génial . Merci pour avoir defendu ce clavier des médisants. Je le decouvre petit a petit et il me delivre ses secrets pour mon plus grand bonheur .🎉

[@carstenherbst2934]

100% right ! The Jupiter X / XM is MUCH more than a VST in a Box ! all these VSTi users seems to have only 8 Tracks in their Projects. A VSTi consumes a LOT of CPU Power, thats a FAKT ! A Hardware Synth need´s nearly 0% CPU Power, and yes, sometimes it can be that simple ! U need a Intel i9 CPU or a Mac with M1 and Apple Silicon Native versions of your Favorite VSTi to make a Complex Project working. Don´t belive ? Try to make something great without Hardware and use Powerfull synths like Voltage Modular or UVI Falcon and then keep an eye on your Computer resources... If your PC is not a FAST one u will very soon face it´s Limit ! But even if this don´t count for u, A Hardware with real Knobs u can play with, has it´s own advantage over any VSTi controled by a PC-Mouse - The Mouse is not an intiutive tool for Creative Musicans and will NEVER beat a Physical Knob to control a Filter, Resonance, Drive, LFO, you name it, will allways better than a Mouse that can only alter one virtual knob instead of 2 or 3 !!!

[@aliciafranco5704]

I would be very grateful if you would compare the Roland Jupiter X to SEQUENTIAL Prophet Xl ❤❤❤❤❤ At the very least.... what are your thoughts on the Prophet XL? LOVE your analytical take on this synth☆

[@arcadeaudio1979]

That would be an awesome video, unfortunately I don't have a Prophet. If you email Sequential and tell them you'd like to see me do a video maybe they would send me a demo unit to borrow! Reach out to them on twitter or via email and if they send me one I'll definitely do a video.

[@defiantDreemurr]

this is not in any way based on insider knowledge or anything this is just my own flawed memory of what i *think* i read, but as far as i'm aware ZEN-Core is *evolved* from the ACB technology but with a focus on performance vs accuracy, the roland cloud plugins are really CPU intensive because of how accurately they model the like, intricate details of the circuitry, while the ZEN-Core stuff is perhaps a bit less hardware accurate but runs much more easily and isn't quite so intensive. but i would take this with a grain of salt, i don't know for sure if i'm remembering that right or if what i read was even right, plus personally i don't really care either way because the ZEN-Core model expansions sound really great at least on my computer so i imagine the jupiter-x probably sounds just as good, and ultimately that's what i care most about rather than whether it's just a VST in a box or smth like that

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Thanks for watching Lauren!

[@MrSpasticdancer]

i dont know why some people would think that software simply can't faithfully emulate analog synths when software is used for things like accurately forecasting the weather by simulating it, simulating complex physics etc. there isnt really anything software can't do, i mean its software for gods sake.

[@rayderrich]

I won't necessarily agree that the most important aspect of a hardware synth is how it sounds. I can get superb sounds by using VST's like UVI Falcon any time of day. I think the major buying reason for me would be how accessible the engine is from the front panel controls. If this machine is fun to design sounds on plus fun to play it can win me over, else a Roland Cloud subscription is the better way. This is my personal opinion.

[@ManOfJupiterMusic]

that song at 3:00 reminded me of sea within a sea from the horrors

[@arcadeaudio1979]

Not familiar with that. Hopefully it’s good!

[@teknical100]

I changed the keys on my JD800 and wired in a varaible resistor for the aftertouch, it became a completely different synth.

[@mathewg1747]

The internal speakers are a great feature. It keeps the Juno X portable

[@indiefilmcomposer]

Would like to see a rack version to replace integra !

[@arcadeaudio1979]

I like keyboards myself, but would be cool if the option was available for the people that prefer that.

[@tonylancer7367]

Hey there! I was a confused soul (probably still am) looking to buy a Roland FA. But after your demo, I've been on a Google trip round town trying to figure out if I should get this (in my case, the mini-Jupiter). The main reason for the FA was the classic Roland sounds, but this looks more interesting. Should I rather invest in this or keep looking to get an FA?

[@jpincas]

I had a Jupiter XM for about a year. Incredible sound - clarity like I've never heard. Unfortunately the complexity of the UI was a total killer for me, especially the sequencer part. If I spent even just 2 weeks away from the synth, I found myself having to relearn everything, which, in the end, just killed any enjoyment, so I sold it. I also found the keybed and keysize horrible. IMHO, the best use case for this would be attached to a brilliant keyboard/sequences from Arturia or Novation, where you'd have quick access to all the parts via different midi channels - so basically just a 5 part multi-timbral sound module - but a very good one.

[@GrayGhostDog1]

The Xm is the only synth I own with mini-keys... but I do have an M-Audio Oxygen Pro Mini with similar size keys. The Oxygen Pro Mini's keys are semi-weighted, though. I have a Novation SL Mk3 also as my central controller... My Xm is not going anywhere! I understood what it offered and I do not have anything else like it in my gear-space.

[@idobabayoff]

hi, great video thanks! Main reason I bought the Jupiter-X because I felt I wanted a machine that knew how to produce Roland sounds. thats it. I think it does that very good, and Layering tones is a GREAT BONUS. dont have any problem with the keys, they are good. as for the system 8 - i like it a lot but they sound different. So far so good. but...the are things I didnt like : Inconvenient work process, Screen on the side and not in the middle, Menu diving, driver not support Win7 only Win10 which requires me to switch OS/Computer. I have other "big" synths like the polybrute, pro3, summit. in all of them sound design is heaven. in this synth i mainlly using preset. But - this one is ok with me because of the nature of the synth... SO. Overall - good sounding synth (deliver on the ***MAIN*** promise , lots of roland vintages, Layering, that LOOK!!!). but.. too expansive if u ask me

[@samprock]

JupiterX was very tempting, though I save budget and desk space for another comparable poly synth. I guess I could enter Zen-Core with VerseLab? (besides Zenbeats app). Besides aesthetics of JupiterX vs Arturia (or Moog or DSI), my minus to have it is no VST, as direct as Polybrute (and multi-instantiated!). It seems awkward to me to have expensive, digital-powered 17Kg of a device, not having efficient connect to the DAW. Whole Zen-core ecosystem that assumes me paying monthly to use it to the full is also not very appealing. I kinda happy did not buy JX in spring, ..... tnx to virus :)

[@arcadeaudio1979]

VerseLab looks cool, I'd like to check one out.

[@EHiggins]

I love my Jupiter-X have you got the JD-800 expansion? It's flipping amazing, and does not suck! There are a lot of haters for this beast. It kind of cracks me up, because I think people didn't think they would have to learn anything to get the most out it. A lot of the complaints translate to me as "I don't want to take time to learn this, so it sucks". At least it came with a manual. The Wavestate just came with a piece stuck to it that said, try the random button. So that's what I ended up doing. I just hit random until I get something I like. lol The key bed on the X is excellent. I can't speak about the Xm, but the Wavestate I mean yeah, it's a lot less in price, but there is no comparison it feels like a toy compared to the X. I agree with you though, they both sound awesome.

[@arcadeaudio1979]

I got the JD-800 expansion last night and played around with it for about an hour. I like it a lot based on first impressions.

[@EHiggins]

@@arcadeaudio1979 Go back through the sounds with Unison if you haven't. Some of them will melt, other will move objects lol

[@dirkkeersmaekers4343]

@@arcadeaudio1979 Do you need a lifetime key?Or pro or ultimate?

[@billmay7364]

Jupiter X on its way. I'm all about Analog but the X has its place. Blend nicely with my MOOG XL And Model D. OB6 and Phophet10. Jupiter 8 is classic like CS80. Jupiter X sounds great and why not go with it. Digital has its place. The C15 is just stunning and that is Digital. I'm sure there is some colors I can work the Jupiter X footprint into Composition. With Sound I try to keep a open mind Being a Analog guy. Jupiter X will do well.

[@mauchkimberly]

I don't have it but I like it and would get it if I had the money. But I don't use a computer for making music, so for me, it would provide the sounds. If I were someone who made most music with vsts maybe it wouldn't be as valuable. I guess it depends on why the person is interested in it. I saw that guy's video, and, really, I think he hated it because it wasn't "authenic" enough for him, in looks or the oscillators. But I don't think it was meant to be completely authentic. More, reminiscent. And, in reality, having the authentic one (in perfect condition) might be fun, but it wouldn't be able to do what this one does. I've gone back and forth about the xm. A bit spendy for me, currently. The x is too big for my space and if I had the space I'd get the system 8 (even with those fugly green lights).

[@arcadeaudio1979]

You might be right, the other reviewer might have had a real bias towards it because it just wasn't the real deal Jupiter 8.

[@jovis3471]

I like drive knob and age and temp settings make Jupiter different from fantom 8 . They sound same to me except when tweeking knobs the Jupiter has more expression Aft and drive knob . I wish had seq built in

[@SonicExplorer]

Great video. If you have time could you do a video over Juno and Jupiter sounds in the keyboard?

[@arcadeaudio1979]

I'm planning on doing a video about the main models (Jupiter 8/Juno 106/JX8P). Hopefully this weekend.

[@JohnMarinoMusic]

I bought it one week ago and must say its a beast. So many Roland Synths in one unit. Incomparable with Plugins if you are recording it and listening to it with high end equipment.

[@dvamateur]

I bought the Jupiter-X today. I love it. Sounds amazing, it's built of metal, the keyboard feel is fantastic. What's not to like? By the way, my main selling point of the Jupiter-X is the fact that it does not have a touchscreen. In my opinion, touchscreens have to go. Replacing real buttons and sliders with a touchscreen is simply a cost cut that I am not willing to take.

[@parkmedia]

Touchscreen is not designed to replace sliders. It is there to make navigation in menu or preset lists easier, and to show more information while playing without paging. I'd love to have a touch screen or at least a much bigger screen on the JP/X. To be honest I am afraid to buy a JPX with this tiny screen. Most of users hate to dig in menus, just like me.

[@dvamateur]

@@parkmedia Well, Jupiter-80 had a color touchscreen and LGBTQZ colored category select row of buttons. Both ruined the aesthetics quite a bit. Too bad, because it is a beautifully soundung instrument, with great keybed, and well beilt chasis. If the Jupiter-80 didn't have a touch screen but a few sliders instead, it would have certainly be more diserable. But even that, Jupiter-80 is very good. It's like two Integra-7 modules, sans the SRX-series libraries.

[@parkmedia]

Agree :) When I wrote that touch-screen is a good thing, I was thinking about the original Roland V-synth for example. Lots of controllers, plus a big screen with excellent structure and layout.

[@kevinbirge2130]

I would be surprised if it did. If I could have any synth, at any price point, I would own this.

[@JarrettBrad]

You dont get why a VST is uninspiring? To me that signals that you dont have a discerning ear for tone.

[@arcadely]

This is really quite a helpful video - thank you. I have a long wishlist of synths, one of which is "something like a Jupiter 8". Of course a real Jupiter 8 is just a ludicrous quantity of money if and when you can find one for sale at all. But the X just sounds... absolutely fantastic, unless something has gone disastrously wrong with my ears. It's really interesting: is it exactly the same? Probably not. Is it close enough for me? Definitely. This actually is in fairly stark contrast to something like the Yamaha DX7 or DX7ii where the Reface DX is similar but far enough away that it bugs me. The fact that OG DX7s and DX7iis are still affordable means you can guess where I'm going - except of course I can't decide between the two of them. The Jupiter X remains more of an aspirational purchase for now, but it's always fun to do the research. Great video: I hope you do a lot more.

[@ptkelly80]

The reface DX is only four operators, so it would never sound the same as a DX7 or DX7IID.

[@arcadely]

@@ptkelly80 True, but the way the algorithms are structured in the DX7 - i.e., the way the operators are combined - doesn't require you to use all of them. There are plenty of DX7 patches that use 4 operators or fewer, many of which the Reface DX would be able to reproduce. I doubt it would sound exactly the same, just as the DX7 and DX7ii don't sound exactly the same, but for patches using up to four operators it would be pretty close. The additional two operators the DX7 has make all the difference though, and obviously the Reface won't be able to replicate patches that use them - like I say, far enough away that it's annoying. I guess six operators would probably have pushed the Reface above some predetermined manufacturing and/or retail cost, but frustrating nonetheless.