The Roland Juno-60 Analog Synthesizer

This is an overview of the luscious vintage synth, the Roland Juno-60:

The Roland Juno-60 is a classic six voice polyphonic analog synthesizer with RAM memories for 56 sounds. The sound architecture is rather basic, but it has an excellent sound and was used by many professionals like Eurythmics, Howard Jones, the Madonna producers, Paul Van Dyk and many more… it has the DCB interface – the predecessor of MIDI. With a DCB to MIDI interface it is very easy to integrate the instrument in a midi setup.

To my ears the JUNO-60 sounds far better than the very similar JUNO-106 (I had both). It has snappier envelopes and a fater chorus. However, sound is a matter of taste…

Description:

The Roland Juno-60 is an analog synthesizer produced by Roland Corporation in the early 1980s and a successor to the slightly earlier Juno-6.

Like its predecessor, the Juno-60 has some digital enhancements, used for clocking the oscillators and for saving/loading patches. This instrument was succeeded by the Roland Juno-106 in 1984.

Details on the Roland Juno-60 below.

If you’ve used the Juno-60, leave a comment!

Specifications:

  • 6 voice polyphony
  • DCO: pulse, saw, and square
  • LFO – rate and delay
  • Non-resonant high pass and resonant low pass filter
  • VCA – level, ADSR and gate
  • 61 note keyboard (no velocity or aftertouch)
  • DCB Roland to Roland sync/interface (Roland MD-8 converts DCB to MIDI for MIDI control)

Resources:

via AnalogAudio1

10 thoughts on “The Roland Juno-60 Analog Synthesizer

  1. I bought a Juno60 in almost as new condition about two months ago for a pitence! I'm no keyboard player and know sweet fa about this. All that matters to me is it has all the sounds and more that I need for my recording project. And those sounds are so sweet and powerful it brings me out in goose bumps every time my fingers touch the keys.

  2. I bought a Juno60 in almost as new condition about two months ago for a pitence! I'm no keyboard player and know sweet fa about this. All that matters to me is it has all the sounds and more that I need for my recording project. And those sounds are so sweet and powerful it brings me out in goose bumps every time my fingers touch the keys.

  3. The Juno 60 was easier to program than the 106, and there is a difference in the sound, although I am not sure I would say one was better than the other. I have suspected it was the power supply that made the difference, but this may be just my stupid idea. There is just something about this keyboard that just wants to make play.

  4. The 60 and the 106 have the same architecture and layout and have two main differences, the 60 has an integrated arpeggiator and the 106 has polyphonic portamento and midi. I have both of them, the 106 sounds fatter (bass wise) and this is because the sub-oscillator is 6dbs louder than the one on the 60 but on the rest of the spectrum the 106 is a little bit "thinner" and "sharper". The 60 has the same filter as the Jupiter 8, and the overall sound is fuller, more raw, and grungier, the filter has a more pleasant and warm harmonic distortion. Being hybrid synths I would say that the 60 is just one step from the border towards the analog sound and the 106 towards the digital.

  5. The Juno 60 is better than the 106, I have both. The 60 is much more beautiful than the 106, the 60 sounds are more powerful and fat. The 60 is very very reliable, not the 106.

  6. agreed… the voice chips on my 106 have had issues twice… my 106 is still working fine (im not sure for how much longer though)… the 60 sounds way better to me, but i guess that's just opinion… wow this is an old thread…

Leave a Reply