Unlock the Power of the Roland Alpha Juno with the Retroaktiv MPG-50!

►Check out my other synth videos: • SYNTHESIZERS - Vintage...
Who needs a Juno 106? The Alpha Juno is much more powerful, and not just for hoover sounds. With a total of 14 oscillator shapes, analog filters (the same as the JX-8P, another great vintage synth), the ability to pulse width modulate the pulse AND sawtooth waves, velocity and aftertouch, and the list goes on and on.
So why do they sell for a third of a Juno 106?
Because vintage synth nerds love faders!
And now, with the magnificent Retroaktiv MPG-50 - we have them! Let's check it out live together and see what tricks it has up its sleeve.
►TIP: streamelements...
►MERCH: merch.streamel...
►Other Links: linktr.ee/Vult...

[@Jacob-ur3lh]

I bought this for my Alpha Juno 1. It is totally worth the price. Also for those who are claiming the Alpha Juno is digital it is not. It is analog. One way to test is to record it in a DAW at an extremely high sample rate. It is continuous and the audio does not cut out as a digital keyboard would.

[@VultureCulture]

Good point! The rumor about the alpha Juno being a nco synth is just that, a rumor. But misinformation gets passed around on the internet very easily these days

[@XanderEwald]

The audio of a digital synth does not cut out either though. The digital signal is converted to a discrete, analogue voltage by the DAC before it leaves the synth.

[@kekethetoad]

The resonance of this synth is like melted butter 🤌

[@VultureCulture]

Honestly it's one of my favorites and it's so weird to me that people don't like the filter

[@AEMachinas]

Hey buddy Juno related but this is my old 106 from back in 1997 recorded on a magnavox double cassette deck with mic input on the back, those rigs slayed! Thanks for what you do Vulture, your not just picking the bones you are giving resurrection to synthesis appreciation.

[@VultureCulture]

I appreciate you 🙏

[@dale116dot7]

Alpha Juno service manual shows IC5, a MB87123, that appears to be a DCO, similar to the J106, except it’s six channels on one 24 pin IC. The intonation sounds better than a J106 to me. Also on aliasing, putting a synth, theremin, or similar played at high frequencies can make a class D amplifier generate aliasing artifacts.

[@VultureCulture]

Thank you for the info Dale 🙏

[@mitchelstephen7536]

Aww, I have an Xpander and a Jupiter 6 but I still can't bring myself to sell the Alpha Juno (an MKS-50 with the programmer). Lords of Acid "Lust" is a great Alpha Juno album.

[@VultureCulture]

I'll have to go back and relisten! The Alpha is one of the most underrated analogs from that era

[@atetraxx]

Yea a-Juno is absolutely analog. It's weird that some people think otherwise. I guess I get it, it was created to compete with the dx

[@VultureCulture]

There's a lot of well intentioned people who get swept up in the misinformation of a certain type of vintage synth snob.

[@kekethetoad]

Love the enthusiasm! Those crazy sinister basses man haha! I really hope Roland makes an ACB plugout for this or the 2!

[@VultureCulture]

Agreed!

[@offworldsynths2019]

Fantastic video again!!! Cost me a fortune but just bought this controller. Worth it though❤

[@VultureCulture]

Oh hell yeah! I love everything Retroaktiv does and you won't be disappointed

[@aquaticborealis4877]

Damn, missed the stream. That Alpha Juno sounds amazing.

[@VultureCulture]

It really is the most underrated analog synth of the 80's!

[@recycology5468]

I wish they made a unit for the AX73!

[@VultureCulture]

I know! They very well might one day!

[@EuroDJ]

Many people on many sites often do not delve into the nuances, so they say that this is a pure analog synthesizer, since it contains DCO. Although if you delve into this topic, it turns out that only the first DCOs were purely analog ... like the first Junos - 6 / 60 / 106. And we can actually see the analog circuit of their oscillators in service manual. However, no one has been able to provide the same analog circuitry to aJuno. Later, other companies began to apply the DCO abbreviation to their digital synthesizers. For example, the oscillators in the Casio CZ-101 (1984) are called DCO. But we know that CZ-101 is not analog. The same goes for Kawai K4 - oscillators are called DCO. It's just another good marketing ploy. And if you consider that Casio CZ-101 with digital DCO was released a year earlier than Alpha Juno... So why couldn't aJuno use the same marketing? ) Therefore, the abbreviation DCO is often misleading. And the sites often erroneously (perhaps erroneously) write that since aJuno contains DCO, it is an analog synthesizer. But no one has seen a detailed diagram of the DCO chip of aJuno, where the analog elements for signal conditioning would be visible, as can be clearly seen in the DCO of Juno-60. Moreover, some experts just say the opposite, that in the DCO of aJuno the wave formation is just digital. Eg: "...Then, the top 8 bits of the accumulator are sent to a DIGITAL waveshaper, and then to what looks like an R-2R based DAC on-chip. This signal is then sent straight to the fully-analog filter. " (Russell McClellan) ... Notice the word: DIGITAL waveshaper So it's quite possible that aJuno is not a pure analog synth, but a hybrid one, Digital Oscillators + Analog Filter. Moreover, in those days there were just popular hybrid synthesizers, such as the Korg DW-8000 (1985), which contained digital oscillators, but analog filters.

[@VultureCulture]

I will have to do more research. All the articles I've ever seen lead back to this one guy - but it looks like he's a programmer for iZotope so I'm inclined to think he knows more than me. Nevertheless my instinct is that to say they're digital oscillators is probably an overreach. The Casio's Ensoniq's dw-8000's and Waves of the era had digital oscillators and analog filters but were not capable of pulse width modulation because their oscillators were essentially one frame of a wavetable sampled and saved in ROM. The Wave tried to get around this type of thing with many samples that sound close but still no interpolation. So if the Alpha's oscillators are digital they are digital in a very different way than the other digital oscillators of the age. But I am open to being wrong and having my mind changed!

[@EuroDJ]

​@@VultureCulture In addition to all of the above, I would like to remind you that the digital PWM was already in the Roland D-50 (1987) ... the difference from the aJuno (1985) is only two years. And if you consider that Eric Persing said that he already had a prototype of the almost finished D-50 at home half a year before the official release of the D-50 ... then the time difference between aJuno and D-50 is even less. So it's likely that digital PWM wasn't a big deal in those years. PWM could have been easily implemented through a wavetable like a Waldorf 5 years before the release of alpha juna. This technology has been around for a long time. And I don't think you need to store a lot of periods in memory for the sound to be smooth enough. Moreover, any digital synthesizer is based on samples in one way or another (check DDS synthesis with NCO oscillators). So... DX7 (the oscillator generates a sine wave based on a quarter of the sampled sine from the ROM, actually a rompler), VA synths like Virus, etc... contain filtered sawtooth, square, etc. samples. The same D50 - if you listen to PWM at the lowest octaves, you will see that samples are still the basis, since the spectrum at the lowest octaves drops too much, high frequencies are cut off, as happens in low-quality small samples when transposed. After all, there are other methods for creating PWM from samples. For example, two saws with invert pahase with a special mutual modulation setting (a primitive implementation was described by Don Solaris), or one of the PWM methods is described in the Roland JV-1080 manual, in the section where the synthesis structure with distortion is described. But still, I think that the easiest way is a wavetable with different square percentage positions. It is also possible through phasedistortion, where the sample will be distorted in a certain percentage. If we take into account that Roland D110 uses the phasedistortion method to implement the filter, then it is quite likely that PWM is also implemented through this mechanism. Well, as you know, Casio also uses the phase distortion principle for filtering. All of them are somehow based on samples and their transformation. These are all variations of digital synthesis. I did not say that they are banal romplers, I said digital oscillators. Yes, they are more complicated than those of the DW-8000, because in addition to playing samples, there is still additional digital processing. But nevertheless, these are still digital oscillators). In any case, this is no longer a purely analog synthesizer, but a hybrid = Digital Osc + Analog Filter. Moreover, many romplers also have various digital processing of samples. For example JD-990 can produce Sync, Ring. and so on. Korg Korg01W can distort the waveform with waveshapers, etc... this is also digital processing of samples (similar to phasedistortion)

[@EuroDJ]

​@@VultureCulture Additional Information about aJuno osc -drive.google.com/drive/folders/1RMdjJPNLrPRmkdQ1bDZahE6Ih1n-0wra?usp=share_link

[@VultureCulture]

In 1985 2 years was massive in terms of the evolution of synthesis technology. Moreover this was the era where digital was king, Roland was proud to announce the D-50 as their first digital synthesizer, because they knew that would help it sell. You would think they would have been happy to sell the Alpha Juno as a hybrid like the DW-8000. The idea that the A Juno is using PWM in a similar manner to the PPG Wave by storing many wavetables is unlikely. You can easily hear the stepping / lack of interpolation in that method, and plus, there would need to be an additional chip to store those tables in ROM, which to my knowledge doesn't exist. The most that article claims is that the waveshaping of the sawtooth is digital, not analog, but similar to how the tuning of an analog oscillator can be controlled digitally it sounds like the waveshaping can be too. Consider the method for creating a pulse wave, basically just oscillating up when a cycle completes and then down. Even if the creation of those changes is instructed by a digital waveshaper, the resulting waveform would still be analog. Finally, consider the JD-800 / 990, a digital synth released 6 years later by Roland, incapable of PWM because it's sample based and Roland couldn't figure out how to implement interpolating wavetables in that product. It doesn't seem plausible to me that Roland had it figured out 6 years earlier with a budget synthesizer at the time. I really want to thank you for how interesting and lively this conversation has been. I still doubt that describing the Alpha's oscillators as digital is the most clear and accurate way to describe them, but it's really gotten my mind going and it's a lot of fun to kick around ideas like this 🙏

[@EuroDJ]

@@VultureCulture The SERUM VST synthesizer has a good example of PWM based on the sample table among the basic patches. This proves that creating PWM on banal samples is not a big deal. Moreover, wavetable synthesis already existed 5 years before the release of Alpha Juno. I think during this time they could improve it well. And I don't think you can hear any steps at low table sampling resolution. In the case of Waldorf, different timbre pieces are changed there, in the case of PWM it is always a square, only with different duty cycles. So in reality I don't think there are many different one-period samples needed. Moreover, with a fast LFO, even one period is not completely played. As for the sample chip, the samples could be hardwired into the DCO chip. For example, in the DX7 chip you will not find a separate chip with samples either, although the quarter-sine samples are wired directly in the same chip with oscillators. So I don't think it's a problem. As for the lack of PWM in JD .... This synthesizer was originally focused on playing a large number of samples, so it was probably expensive to make an additional digital engine that could generate PWM through wavetable. Moreover, they already had PWM in earlier D50 / D10. I don't think it was a problem for them. Just a different "rompler" concept. ;)

[@wormholewest]

dang wish the retroaktiv had an arp

[@johnb2044]

Sadly $550 US ......... my juno 2 was $500 so went with an ipad gen 4 for $75 and iPG-800 for $15 and a iRig midi for $20 iPG-800 is a MIDI Controller iPad app emulating the functionality of the PG-800, PG-300, PG-200 and PG-1000 ???

[@VultureCulture]

That's a totally viable way to control the Alpha if the Retroaktiv controller is out of someone's budget - and nothing wrong with that! Daddy loves money! 💰

[@johnb2044]

@@VultureCulture yep stuck on the wrong side of the border in BC Canada so taxes and shipping we get hit hard then import duties just kills it ..... plus the sub par Canadian dollar .....

[@atetraxx]

Yea ipad works but this thing is definitely worth $500. What a beast

[@VultureCulture]

Incredible

[@XanderEwald]

People who seriously care whether a synth is analog or digital have always been suspicious to me. It either sounds good or not, that’s all that matters.

[@VultureCulture]

Totally agree

[@ZapAndersson]

The DX7 never sounded good. Just saying 😂

[@VultureCulture]

@ZapAndersson hahahaha

[@gilo7171]

Too expensive....

[@VultureCulture]

What vintage synth / controller combo would you recommend instead?

[@ben_moy]

Yeah this thing is gorgeous and I'm sure it's worth all the work that went into it and build quality but I can't justify paying $555 to control a synth I paid $275 for when I can use a $5 app.

[@VultureCulture]

@ben_moy I understand where you're coming from. For me it comes down to do I think $830 is too much for an awesome sounding analog synth from 85 with hands on controls? Not for me.

[@mightcouldbe]

@vultureculture totally - especially when you see prices on the Juno-106 these days. If I was mainly a synth player and not a guitarist, played out more regularly, or recording was a full-time gig, I'd have to really think on it! The cheapest modern hardware controller for these I've seen is nearly $300, and it's certainly not as nice as this.

[@jimabbey9544]

The world of synthesizers is vast, and for an instrument that really only came to prominence within the last 50 years, has truly exploded into a wide and dynamic field-at least compared to other types of instruments. Being so tied to technology at the core of their operation.I was a child of the 80s and Digital was the thing,with mostly FM synthesizers.,for example The Yamaha DX1 and DX7 both Icons in the 80s or later the Korg M1, Both brands made thier mark!But on the other hand you had Moog who was left collecting dust due to they were Annalogue.Pretty much meaning you couldn't Just hit a preset and away you go! You had to engineer the sounds,you wanted,Hard work but very satisfying to hear the end results of your labor!My Older Brother ,i remember was so in to Moog and Analogue synths and what he listened to bands Like Yes,Elp later Tangerine dream and so many others!All bands who had the Analogue Edge and very Unique sound that made those bands who the were,Take Gary Numan(one of my Heroes)!! Always had that Analogue edge to his music,though now is using mostly software VSTs,I guess when you are pressed for space and not wanting lug around 4-8 chunky Synths to your gigs.I can see using VSTs! NOT me i have to have hardware synthesizers ,Annologue especially. I always Want to have a sound all my own,put my personal stamp on eveything i do! So Where do You stand on the Digital and Analogue debate?i would love to read some of your responses!!

[@VultureCulture]

Digital vs Analog is a deep and varied debate. I think nowadays, *in theory*, digital should be as good as analog, but a lot of times soft synth companies drop the ball when it comes to resonance. When it comes to vintage, I love some of those early digital synths, the D-50, Wavestation, SD-1, K1 + K4 - because of the low resolution and innovative techniques they implemented to make the synths even work. I love analog synths but they can be limited. Is it that they're analog or that they're 1 knob per function that I really love? Hard to say lol

[@jimabbey9544]

@@VultureCulture im not a Factory preset guy. The only Presets i use in my band are the ones i create! lol

[@AbsurdTV1]

Sounds freakin amazing. I got @juno1

[@VultureCulture]

It's really the most understanding analog synth of the 80's