Two New Synths Inspired By The Roland Juno


Developer Jan Östman has announced two new synthesizers inspired by the voice of the Roland Juno, the Jupiter-X monosynth and the smaller Ju-X.

Östman says that the DCO is a replica of the Juno-106 DCO, but the original 8253 timer is replaced with an ATmega.

The Jupiter-X is a tabletop monosynth that recreates a single Juno DCO voice.


  • jupiter-x-synthesizerA monophonic synth with a single Juno DCO voice.
  • Oscillator with SAW, SQR/PWM and SUB waveforms.
    SUPERSAW unison setting for the SAW waveform.
  • LFO and AR-envelope.
  • DSP filter with LPF, HPF and Resonance setting.
  • MIDI input for note on/off.
  • 5 volt CV/Gate input for oscillator. Frequency range 65-2093Hz (C2-C7).
  • 5 volt CV input for filter cutoff.
  • External audio input to filter.

The Jupiter-X is priced at $330, including shipping.

Ju-XIn addition, Östman announced the Ju-X synth – a smaller Juno-inspired synth.


  • The 65x60mm all analog Ju-X monophonic Juno voice..
  • Just CV/Gate, PWM-CV and Pitch-CV 0-5v analog inputs.
  • SUPERSAW unison setting for the SAW waveform.
  • Great for sequencing and use with external filter.

Ju-X is priced at $70, including shipping.

Östman expects to have sound demos available in December.  DIY versions are also planned.

You can preorder the synths via Östman’s site.

87 thoughts on “Two New Synths Inspired By The Roland Juno

            1. VCO or DCO – that couldn’t matter less in terms of the sound when implemented in a mono synth. DCO were used for tuning stability across a the poly voices, but in no way produces a different sound. Compare the envelope circuits, most importantly the filter – SH-101 is a VCO-based single Juno voice.

                1. And portamento (lacking on the Juno-60), envelope to pulsewidth modulation (lacking on the 106), a full mixer instead of just on/off buttons per waveshape, true legato (not on the 60), plus full analog CV control, and noise modulation.

                  There are good reasons to have a 101 next to a 106 or 60 🙂

  1. The name won’t last if Roland’s legal department has any interest in protecting “Jupiter” as part of the Roland brand. They should have called it “Juniper” to get around using either Juno or Jupiter.

      1. If the Jupiter X is a Juno inspired synth why call it a Jupiter and design it to have the colors of a Jupiter? The Jupiter X looks like it has DCO and DCF how is that remotely a Jupiter?
        Lets call them the little Junos that want to be?

      2. Hi there Jan – I didn’t know you’d be answering these comments, else I would have worded things differently.

        Anyway, I was curious so I did some quick searches and found this on Roland’s JP-80 info page: “JUPITER is a registered trademark of and is licensed by K.H.S. MUSICAL INSTRUMENT CO. LTD. in the United States and other countries.”

        So JUPITER is trademarked, but not by Roland. I didn’t find anything regarding JUNO.

      3. I see he’s changed it. Better to be on the safe side, since Roland are still calling things ‘Jupiters’. To be clear, trademarks work by product categories so there is a huge difference between making, say, a toaster (or even a KHS Clarinet) and calling it a ‘Jupiter’ and making a Jupiter Synth. Roland can and have been huge douches about this in the past.

        1. Yeah, this is a legitimate issue. Jupiter is a registered trademark in the context of musical instruments, and he’s used it, and also copied the font and general panel style. Now, I am not confused in the course of commerce because it says “by Janost” and I know that Roland isn’t making these. But in trademark trials they look at whether there is reasonable likelihood of confusion. Would casual consumers assume this is a Roland product? Oh yes many would because it has the name and look. So that’s all going to have to change, probably. So you might ask why software synths will just straight out copy things. Well yeah, they will, but they try to change it a little bit more so it’s obvious it’s not an official product. And you also have things done with permission, such as the Korg ARP Odyssey. Who knows if they have a royalty deal but reports are that the Odyssey designers are cool with it and consulted in the project, so they probably were 1. Paid and 2. Signed a contract. Maybe not but probably.

          Of course Janost could try to get permission and he might.

          I personally think that these “tribute” projects are a great way of validating the original brand, and the companies that tolerate this benefit from it, such as the way Paramount has stated they are OK with Star Trek productions, as long as they are not for profit. When it’s for profit, sometimes it’s cool and sometimes it’s not.

  2. Interesting news although the name really got me confused. I had expected this to be one Jupiter voice, lol. But this is nice, too.

  3. The little ju-x could be awesome with my bass station rack or Arp Odyssey as a third oscillator. If it sounds decent, $70 is a fart in the wind.

  4. Well now I understand why the original dsp-G1 has not been delivered to we early funders. Jan is always putting his effort into the next idea, not fulfilling current orders. Beware.

      1. It’s the nature of independent producers. If you require a fixed schedule, printed manual, and big corporate name, then go with that. If you have some patience for some weird thing that a creative artist has done, yeah, you’ll have to wait until it’s ready. If you’re impatient and looking for a consistent generic corporate experience, there’s nothing wrong with that, but it’s stupid to buy from some small scale artist and then complain he couldn’t deliver the quick turnaround generic corporate experience for your lazy fat white butt.

        1. Hey! How do you know the color of my butt? Why do you think I am lazy? Are you spying on me? I admit I was surprised that Jan was unable to go to his local electronics store and purchase a handful of pots required to finish “his last three synths”. I can only assume now that his pictures are of empty box mock-ups. I had been patient for the last 7 months. Now he has offered my money back instead. I have accepted that.

    1. That knobbed synth have lots of problems.
      Both manufacturing and part sourcing.

      I’ve learned my lesson in the manufacturing world and you can always ask your money back?

      You would have it instantly and I would have 3 unfinished synths.

      1. one can always go above and beyond in “customer service”, i know its kinda absurd term with respect to the way i assume most indie synth manufacturers operate…hopefully you get my 2 cents;), sorry for bloody russian english, peace!:)

  5. If you go to his website (really a WordPress blog) there’s a post titled “The Jupiter-X tabletop synth is now ready” but no videos? No SoundCloud audio? I don’t understand announcing a product with nothing to show.

    1. When I sent the flash, I named 3 different websites. The company website is

      And I told them that the demo is coming in December.

      Still it’s not that fancy, just a timer with a saw integrator and square pulse and sub outputs.

      Heck, if it was the original Juno, you would dislike?

  6. Buyer beware!

    This guy seems to be playing with words a bit, saying it’s got ‘great analog sound’, when it’s really a recreation of a DCO with a digital filter. Where’s the analog?

    Also – crap photos + lack of audio demos not inspiring confidence.

      1. What the fuck kind of question is that, coming from someone who is claiming to be making a synth ” inspired” by the Juno?

        Yes, it was….

        1. Zymos

          Purists will debate the ‘is it analog’ question until they are blue in the face. The Juno line used DCO’s – which some people claim are not analog, but they are analog oscillators that are digitally controlled.

          The Juno, though, used digital envelopes. which are arguably not as snappy as a good analog design.

          And to make things even more fuzzy, it used BBDs, which are basically an analog implementation of a digital delay.

          And the Juno’s were based on IC’s, which some people think don’t sound as ‘analog’ as discrete circuits.

          I’d call it a hybrid!

          More importantly, though, I’m not sure what the similarity is between this design and the Junos. And, if you’re going to used digital components, the place to do it on a single oscillator design is the oscillators, not the filter.

          1. You can call it a hybrid, but in doing so you make the difference between a PPG or ESQ (or the new 002) even more fuzzy, which is completely counterproductive. The Juno’s DCO does not read the waveshape from a memory location. That’s the reason to not call it analog.

            The term “hybrid” might not satisfy the purists but it’s worked fine for 2 decades of colloquial usage on internet discussion forums.

            1. iogy

              I don’t know of any ‘analog police’ that decide what makes a synth ‘pure enough’ to be ‘analog’.

              But for most people, if there are any digital elements that affect the sound of the synth – not just wavetable oscillators – they don’t consider it a pure analog. I

              You wouldn’t consider this Jupiter-X – which has a DSP filter – an analog synth, would you?

  7. I love all these small desktop synths. It makes them much more appealing to someone like me who has very limited space to work with.

    Now, if we could just hear audio demos of these….

  8. 330€ for 1 semi-emulated Juno voice, which would cost almost 2000€ to have 6 voices like a Juno. Don’t really get that. The Ju-X looks interesting for the price though, if you’re into small desktop stuff.

    But it’s obvious English is not his first language, the description of the machines isn’t very clear and feels misleading.

    1. Didn’t know that engrish had to be the first language for building instruments?
      To my knowledge Europe did it long before anyone else, and they didn’t speak English?

      Gosh, I thought all great synths where built in Japan?

      1. My argument about the language was in regards to the selling, not the building. If you want to sell anything online to an international audience, English is the only way to go. That’s a fact that’s hard to deny. I will assume you mean well, but shoddy English will always raise suspicion in native English speakers, whichever country they’re from.

  9. For this price (jupiter-x) you can buy a Microbrute, more interesting than a monophonic Juno. And for just more you can buy a real Juno 106.
    For me, a Juno without polyphony hasn’t interest.

    1. Quote from Rhythm Active in Aussie: “The Microbrutes are all over the place and people want something new”

      I can agree with that and built it as analog as I could.

      The reason for using a DSP for the filter is that I can model it just the way I like, don’t have to search the planet for obsolete noisy chip’s and It’s dirt cheap pricewise.

      Just confess that you can’t do anything by yourself and have to buy everything?
      It’s much nicer than spreading junk all over forums?

      1. Dude, if you release a product you should just let people talk about it, you look like a dick constantly trying to defend, and stifle any debate, especially with such wavy logic

          1. Admin: Boo & Jan, please keep your comments on topic and constructive.

            Jan – it’s clear that readers want to see and hear this in action. Send me audio/video demos when they are available and I will be glad to share them with readers.

  10. I had a Juno-1 and loved it, but frankly, any synth with only one oscillator per voice is too hobbled to thrill me now. The “Roland sound” is a lot better with more than a single DCO. This will be a good box to buy if you have a semi-modular outlook, but solo, it’ll be too thin. There is Feature Creep and then there is This Thing Really Needs A Little More Beef. Pair it up with a tidy item like a MicroBrute or the like; then it’ll shine better.

  11. It seems the Juno range , 106, Alpha Juno etc where classics. Lets hope we see fully fledged versions, from Roland, Behringer,Korg etc
    The way basic synths are really what is ‘bread and butter synthesizers’ instruments that are affordable, not to complex , just useable.
    Great to see all the synth developments going on . The Mode Machines do a great 106 filter?

  12. You are being unprofessional. As a developer, you shoud let people discuss your product, whether it’s contructive/de-constructive. Feedback is essential for you to put out a good product. At the end of the day, the synth will speak for itself.. You are just alienating the very people that will buy it.

  13. I ordered the chip of dsp synth and received it in a timely manner. But the fact that there’s people saying they have never received the full dsp synth worrys me.

  14. Some of these comments seem almost too trolly to be reasonably considered to have originated from the dev’s hand. Let’s locate that elusive grain of salt and give him till 7 December. Best of luck, Mr Ostman!

  15. Jan, the people on this forum ARE your consumers. Some people are going to love your synth, and others are going to hate it. It’s that way for EVERY product that gets showcased on this site. Just roll with it. You can’t argue people into liking something they’ve already decided they don’t. Especially since there is no audio/video demo of the synth to back up your attitude!

  16. I was actually going to but the synth, but after reading the dev’s retarded comments on here there’s no way. I’ll boycott that site from now on.

  17. Hell, these comments here are weird as fuck. Well, let’s see how the project goes on. Even if it’s digital it might be good for something, althouth for 300 Euro the Microbrute blows that thing away for offering the same and a lot more 100% analog… got to be really good to compete at all.

  18. I received my dsp-G1 few weeks after order. I ordered it after the news in hackaday, so I’m guessing Jan is caring about “old projects”. And it’s amazing project and he’s a talented designer.

    But what I don’t understand is his attitude here. You can’t fight all windmills Jan. There’s always critisim, negative feedback and you don’t have to actually respond to that kind of feedback. And if you still want to do it do, keep it friendly. I would just continue producing awesome products and not care what people write at internets.

    Awesome projects, strange person. I’m mixed! I’m potential returning customer but if you keep flaming here, it’s probable that I won’t purchase again. It really means what kind of imago the product has, it’s not all just technical.

    And yes I agree with everyone else; leaving a “product launch” without sound demo is a fail. Just wait until everything is ready and then launch.. You miss half the opportunity this way.

    1. I agree. Ignore the critics, do not even respond. Arguing with them on the internet will make you look petty. Those that can’t create, criticize.

      I think the $70 cv controllable unit will be a big hit for people wanting to expand an analog synth or modular. I would not call these Juno anything, better to have no association at all. Call the big one Shark, the little one Remora, since it will latch on to bigger synths like a remora fish.

  19. It’s nice to have a reminder of those early days. The Juno 106 was my very first synthesizer. Distinctive timbers for sure. Since sampling has been out almost as long as the 106 and the DX7…now in most DAW software they bring in all the old sounds. Marvelous idea for the tweekers but, I gotta figure how many songs I would be writing to actually warrant going down memory lane.

  20. Is this guy drunk or something? What a horrid tone to take with your prospective clientele. Seems like he’s turned a lot of people off already, good for him

  21. I do understand owner of the project puts a lot of efforts in it but he definitely misses some key elements such as correct pricing for market success , marketing strategy and more importantly a good PR.

  22. So i am interested in using the Jano-X as a oscillator expander for my microbrute, but im concerned about the 5v operating range, is this +/- 5v? I could be mistaken but i believe the microbrutes operating range is +/- 12v. typical of analog synthesizers. Would that mean that i would have improperly scaled voltge tracking via the microrbrutes pitch/gate out connected to the jano-x?

    Either way, this little thing looks pretty neat. Perhaps you could design a purposebuilt microbrute osc expander with these nifty chips ye got.

  23. And upping the price after that from 70$ to 90$ doesn’t make it any better. I have the G-1 Chip here, and it sounds good for a 20$ DSPSynth. Can’t wait to hear the demos, but the attitude kinda sucks…

  24. Hey Jan, have you shipped any Ju-x yet? Ive bought and sold 5 synths in the time waiting for mine to come to Aus..

Leave a Reply