Behringer today announced a Roland Juno-60 knockoff, the ‘Neptune-80’.
The Behringer Neptune-80 copies the synth architecture and look of the Juno-6/60, but reduces the size of the control panel and uses a 4-octave keyboard, instead of the 5-octave keyboard of the original. It appears that Behringer may be basing the Neptune-80 dimensions on the Deepmind 12’s form factor.
The original Juno-6/60 has a simple voice architecture, with a single Digitally Controlled Oscillator (DCO) per voice. But, while its voice architecture is basic, the synth is very well designed, sounds great and has an extremely user-friendly interface.
It looks like the Neptune-80 will retain much of what has made the original popular, while adding MIDI and upping polyphony to 8 voices.
Here’s what Behringer has to say about the Neptune-80:
“So, for years you guys have been urging us to build one of the most sought after synths. We managed to resist for a long time, but we finally gave in;-)
Here is the fully working prototype of our Neptune-80, an 8-voice polyphonic synth with original analog matrix, BBD chorus and modern user interface such as LCD Display, USB/Midi etc.
We modeled it after the best sounding 6/60 version and we absolutely love the sound.”
Pricing and Availability:
Pricing and availability details for the Behringer Neptune-80 are still to be announced. The synth in the teaser images is an engineering prototype, and manufacturing is dependent on Behringer being able to obtain parts in production quantities.
Check out the images and let us know what you think of the Behringer Neptune-80 in the comments!
68 thoughts on “Behringer Teases Roland Juno-60 Knockoff, The ‘Neptune-80’”
This practically the polyphonic Jupiter clone everyone wanted
only that it is a juno clone …
Not even close, the Jupiters have 2 oscillators per voice. The cool chorus effect on the Junos help fatten up the sound but it’s just not the same. I love the sound of both though..
PS. It only has the aesthetics of the Juno’s. That does not make it a ‘knock off ‘ on contraire the title could be ” Behringer improves the Juno 6/60’s series”. So sad synthopia moderator has a grudge against Behringer!
Fanboys be like “Sure, Behringer says it’s a cheap copy of the Juno-60! Sure, they copied the look of the Juno-60! Sure, Neptune-80 is a knockoff name! But Synthtopia is biased!”
Meanwhile, everybody else is like “Why does Synthtopia cover all these vaporware knockoffs?”
Everyone is excited because this is a cheap copy of the Juno-106/60. They’re not excited because this is an original Behringer design.
So, when Cherry Audio released the Mercury-6 recently it was described here as an emulation. But, when Behringer release their copies of classic synths, they’re described as ‘knockoffs’. Why the difference?
Knockoffs are cheap copies of the original thing
So, you wouldn’t say that NI and Arturia’s virtual instruments are knockoffs, but you might call Bitwig a knockoff of Ableton Live.
“you might call Bitwig a knockoff of Ableton Live”
Not really. Maybe when they first released it, but by now Bitwig has too many original ideas in it to be a knockoff.
It’s not that difficult to understand the difference, actually. It’s not difficult at all.
Not everybody 😉
I don’t understand why Behringer didn’t continue improving or building upon the Deepmind series instead of going sideways with synthesizer copies instead true creativity demonstrated by the DM.
Deepmind is a 106 inspired.
This one is intended to be a 1:1 copy.
Two different machines, confusing a Juno 106 with a 60 is like confusing a Mercedes Class A with a Class C.
I think you completely missed the point of his comment. He is not confusing a 60 with a 106, but rather questioning why didn’t they produce another synth in the Deepmind series. I can only assume the reason is $. These knockoffs are probably more profitable, because like everything else, most people only want what they already know.
I’d put it differently. People are often receptive to new designs. But for Behringer it’s less risky to do the knockoffs for the same reason it’s less risky for movie studios to do sequels or remakes than original ideas: they don’t have to guess whether there’s an audience. They already know there is.
Behringer knows they’ll sell more synths by copying Roland than if they attempted to release an original design. Everyone already knows what a Juno 106 is. Everyone knows how it sounds. Roland did a great job on the user interface and internals. It’s famous because it’s old and now somewhat rare.
Tho i like some of the clones – including the Neptune.
Agree that having a line of unique original Behringer synthesizers would have been great.
If all the effort went into new designs there could be a complete line of original synths by now.
From monophonic single osc to multi osc, paraphonic, polyphonic, digital and analog, FM, wavetable, grooveboxes, drum machines, etc. etc.up to a behemoth flagship.
Still – it is hard to jilt the juno clone …
If it sounds the part, count me in.
instantly triggered the thought: “i want this”
but could go for the deepmind wich does juno sounds and then some …
Is this a scrambled/cut-down version of Deepmind and are there not missing some features on the arp?
Behringer continue their parade of synths that dont require preset saving….anyone else notice how they avoid the synths that have preset buttons with nearly all of their releases?
I’d suggest another look. There is clearly a programmer section with “write” and “preset +/-” buttons.
Bro, there is literally an entire preset selection/saving section on the righthand side of the synth… just like there was on the Juno-60. Moreover, even the Deepmind has patch memory and that was the synth that got Behringer into the synth game.
yes! it’s a conspiracy to defraud the users of their valuable presets technologogijimicky.
Chris, this synth has patch memory. See the display and patch buttons on the right side of the panel.
This looks to be a very interesting synth… I just hope that very high pitched whine you heard in some Deepmind synth patches has been fixed… I had a DM12 which was great but suffered from that frequency bug… anyway, we’ll see but so far, it’s looking good.
they should do the Jup-8 or the SH-7
this is meh imho
Jeez, b-ear-ringer could ya be more redundant¿ Ridiculously solidifying your moronic MO mantle as king of the knockoff clone clowns. Are there really people out there with the where with all of anykind of decent sensibility, being duped by these dupes of caustic shinola crap¿Please geez¿ folks
Did you use a amiga 2000 typing automator for all that text?
that’s Synthtopia new AI chatbot.
aah ok so Trey works for Synthtopia, that makes sense thx mate
I had an A2000 running Toaster and a Perception card to render my animations… seems like a million years ago lol!
I had an SGI Iris Indigo running blender3d. it was ages ago! :0)
Awesome setup. Recently got Blender after watching someone learn it in 100 hours and then create some really incredible images.
definitely! i gave up on it a long time ago though. it’s a wonderful tool, and Ton was a big hearted guy to do it. i never liked PC’s, so I stopped using it after I had no time for the IRIX port anymore.
every industry needs a huge open source project – to keep the money grubbers honest(er).
The original Juno-60 has a simple voice architecture, but it’s sound is magical and has loads of character. Eager to see if Behringer manages to capture its essence.
Spoiler alert: they won’t
Yeah, I don’t really expect them to do either. But to be fair, their clones of Model D, Pro 1, 303, 808, and 909 are much closer to the originals than I’d expect given their very low cost.
If you don’t mind only four voices and the small Boutique form factor, the Roland JU-06A is great, and it can be had new in the box with warranty for four Benjamins.
Hmm, a cheap knock-off of the classic DeepMind synth.
I knew this day would come.
lol. yeah. some folks; you know?
I will buy it if it’s 5 octaves. 8 voices needs it!
I get why some would want this, yeah. For me the voice count is mainly for the tails – that spindly pwm release is actually pretty dope.
8-voice. That is a miss right there. Hard to build a clone when you change the voice structure right off the bat. It will be impossible to play anything that relies on the 6 voice technique of the synth.
Could you elaborate? I’d be curious to hear an example of something that relies on that 6 voice technique. How would it sound on an 8 voice synth?
I can see Roland filing a lawsuit as this infringes on every design in every way. You don’t want to mess with a big company like Roland as they will get you big time. They gotten InMusic back in 2005.
Philip K. Dick used a word for this type of thing when he wrote about the future: “ersatz”. Nothing wrong with ersatz objects but they do tend to cause confusion and intrigue when used in plot lines concerning the future and or alternate realities. There are so many options now to get this type of sound and interface, it seems to me that half of the pleasure derived from owning such a thing would be derived from the aura of its authenticity. I myself own a fake Gucci belt and I find it hilarious to wear in certain situations but ultimately it’s just a reminder that I do not command the type of disposable income to get the real thing. I enjoy wearing my cheaper belt, the brand of which I do not even recall, much more.
Dick was a genius and “ersatz” perfectly describes Behringer’s synths.
They’re cheap synths that seem more valuable than they really are, because they’re knockoffs of classic gear.
If you look at Behringer’s knockoffs without drinking the Koolaid, just about any modern synth is much more capable and a better value. Some people are suckers, though, and will pay extra for a synth, if it looks like something rare.
Consider the Behringer D and the Korg Monologue. For the same price, the Monologue has a more powerful synth voice, has keyboard, has a powerful sequencer, has patch memory, etc. So why does anybody think the D is a bargain? It seems expensive for what you get – a cheap, Chinese knockoff.
Remember that LinnDrum they teased, or the MPC look-alike or those weird looking volcas, or the Bulcha or a whole DAW. Every post, we’ll all jump to say our piece then move on. Who does it serve (our own intellectual self-indulgence) and what does it matter(it doesnt).
I’m’s gone by the hell out of dat LinnDrum!
After reading all of the comments, I think I know where the high-pitched whine is coming from: its the comments. 😛
The Synth cloning debate in 4 Steps and 4 Groups:
Step 1: everyone wants clones of vintage classic synths.
Step 2: expensive and cheap clones are manufactured.
Step 3: people wanting clones split into 4 groups:
– 1 love cheap and love expensive clones; happy with everything that makes a sound!
– 2 love expensive but hate cheap clones; like to spend money
– 3 hate expensive but love cheap clones; like to save money
– 4 hate everything; begging for decades for a 303 clone but rejecting all existing ones.
Step 4: the latter 3 groups battle while the first group laughs.
everyone allowed to switch groups anytime 😉
What about those who have no problem with clones, but hate Uli and his shady bs with a passion? 😉
Suggesting they go into the 2nd group because they mostly claim it is shady making cheap clones but it is ok to make expensive ones.
But be advised: the battle between group 2 and 3 is fierce and brutal because of their diametral positions, up to the point where companies decide to no longer send out synth units for review to certain parties.
“happy with everything that makes a sound!“
Was going over all my gear, both hardware/software… so fortunate.
Plus I sample stuff everyday. No complaints, just endless audio sonic fun.
Luckily i mostly find myself in the happy group!
Sometimes however switch to group 2 or 3 depending on the synth model in question.
And on that bad day i blame my inability to be creative on poor synth design alone 😉
comment of the year
I guess the “Saturn” name is reserved for the Jupiter-8 copy. But why is this one named “Neptune”? Shouldn’t it be “UrAnus”?
I realize the joke is about Uranus, but, Roland did have a Saturn, so they probably won’t use that for any clones. And they probably won’t use Mars due to ProMars. They should have gone with Pluto since that would still be a sibling of Juno and still not a planet (well, it is to me, but I’m stubborn).
Forgot to include the fact that Pluto is just more like Juno in that the first syllable ends in U sound and 2nd ends in O. But maybe that would have been too similar and Behringer was afraid of lawsuit. 😉
looks promising. looking forward for that
Roland could’ve done this and sold it for 1000,- easily but nope they rather make devices that nobody really asked for, which then gets hyped by the worst influencers online. Been waiting for a clone for decades, but I absolutely hate that Behringer might be the only choice. Roland you’re stupid!
Group 4 !
Nope like I said before I hate Uli. I don’t hate everyone or everything.
“roland stupid – hate uli – waiting for clones but like none”
all group 4 criteria fulfilled
but ofc haters contradict to everything everyone says 🙂
Looks sh… imo.
Saving on materials drops a few potential customers as well.
It looks cool because it looks like a Juno, but it’s a Behringer.
I’ll wait for the Chinese clone of the Behringer version.