Synth Site: Roland: JX-10: User reviews Add review
Average rating: 4.7 out of 5
page 3 of 15:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  >>>
Mike the Mender a professional user writes:
Yes, the synths are the same internally. The JX has many enhanced features and a better of the best on any synth. The JX8 was a far cheaper, though not a cheap alternative. The membrain switches are not of the standard of those found on the 10. I've had a 10 which responded to sysex messages. Certain eproms do work successfully in this respect. It blows away that idea that the 10 failed on its midi spec. I agree that most I've checked have failed. People probably haven't checked the sysex data dump capabilities, believing that the 10 can't perform that function when their synth would work perfectly well in that respect. It's worth a few minutes of your time for a check! The warmth of the JX10 is stunning. It is effectively 4 Junos in a box with more programming features. The programmer is a great help, though not an essential as some have said. There were several eprom updates. Get the latest if you can. You just might have sysex!!

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Thursday-Dec-02-2004 at 10:45
Rick Yankson a part-time user from US writes:
The need to spread bogus synth mythologies out of nowhere is rampant on this forum, among some. People get very protective of the gear they own, and sometimes need to create "facts" about circuitry that are totally false. Regardless of one's hearing (or hearing problems), or preference for one synth over another, the JX-10 is precisely two JX-8Ps without a doubt. Otherwise you'd have to explain how a custom Roland IR-3R05 VCF/VCA chip (in JX-10) is different from the same IR-3R05 chip (in the JX-8P). The JX-10 has two complete JX-8P synth boards with the same chips, plus some other circuitry to help layer/combine them and add some extra MIDI controller features. JX-10 sounding like an analog "emulation"? Ha ha. What bull. JX-10 is one of the finest DCO polysynths ever built. Period. A #5 rating all the way.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Wednesday-Dec-01-2004 at 13:12
eggwheat a professional user from UK writes:
Just to clear one thing up. The JX10 does not sound like a JX8P. I have a JX8P which I love. Anyway I wanted more polyphony as the 8P is only 6 note. I got the JX10 as I was told its basically two JX8P's in box giving 12 note polyphony. Side by side the JX10 sounds a hell of a lot thinner more digital and like an modern emulation of a JX8P. I checked out the internals..completely different IC's and circuit!! Buy two 8p's rather than a JX10!

Rating: 3 out of 5 posted Tuesday-Nov-30-2004 at 20:10
ANDY WELLS a professional user from UK writes:
Picked my JX10 up for £299 and found the sounds at my disposal totally indispencible !! from the moment it entered the studio no problems, powerfull ! [no quesion] reliable too, this is one hell of a machine, used on both "Pilgrym" albums

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Sunday-Aug-29-2004 at 18:14
Andre Fontaine a hobbyist user from US writes:
I have one of these, and if Lyle Mays still uses one (and I really trust his opinion), then it has to be a great synth. He replaced his old Obie 4-voice with this synth for that classic lead whistle sound on Pat Metheny Group records. Why, they even named a patch after him ('Mays Pad'). The factory patches and the few custom ones that are available on the web just don't do it justice, you have to dig in and program it yourself to get the best out of it, like the last reviewer said. I think the other guy probably meant that the current going price is 'budget' compared to those other classic synths, but indeed the build and quality is up there with the best of them. They went for $2500 new in '86. This is indeed one of the best analogs Roland ever made, up there with the Jupiters. Sometimes you don't need the most aggressive, raw analog grit to get good sounds for your music, this thing can sound like silk but still have great analog warmth. The JX10 is high class, a winner any way you slice it.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Saturday-Jul-24-2004 at 00:02
page 3 of 15:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  >>>