Behringer JT-16 Copies The Classic Roland Jupiter-8, But With Double The Polyphony

At the 2025 NAMM Show, being held Jan 21–25 in Anaheim, CA, Behringer is offering a sneak preview of a new synthesizer, the JT-16.

The Behringer JT-16 synthesizer is another one of the company’s ‘flagship knockoff’ designs. It’s designed to be an inexpensive copy of the classic Roland Jupiter-8, but with double the polyphony, and modern connectivity.

The Behringer JT-16 has been in development for several years. It closely follows the the design of the original Roland Jupiter-8, but the copy is scaled down, reflecting the use of modern electronics manufacturing techniques.

The most notable differences from the original are expected to be the reduced size and weight, the expanded polyphony, and modern connectivity around the back:

The Behringer JT-16 prototype at NAMM was not plugged in when we visited the booth, so it may be too early in development for them to want to demo it.

We’ll share more info as it becomes available.

Pricing and Availability:

Behringer has not announced details on the JT-16 yet, but based on what we currently know, we are not expecting the JT-16 to be available until sometime next year.

20 thoughts on “Behringer JT-16 Copies The Classic Roland Jupiter-8, But With Double The Polyphony

  1. I was very interested in this, but the BX-1 threw a wrench into my plans… I hope both of these have poly aftertouch

  2. I’ve played a jupiter-8 as a kid. There was a shop close by where they had one, and it took them ages to sell it, due to its hefty price. I went there every now and then. The synth architecture is actually a very simple one, but in the eighties there weren’t many polyphonic synths with dual osc’s., and certainly not in a store in a medium sized town.
    Hopefully the B-filters will shine as good as on the original. If not it may just be a ‘good’ synth with ‘many’ voices.

    Let’s wait for sound demo’s

    1. Jup 8 is far, FAR more about the sound of this particular keyboard .. than the architecture of the engine

      i cant really think of a more iconic synth… its easily in that top 5, but its also probably the most well known of them all, outside Moog

  3. This is what Roland should have delivered instead of the Boutique range. Say what you like about Behringer’s ethics, but they know what people want.

    1. I’m quite happy for them to put the boot into Roland. Reissuing their old synths has been an open goal since the mid nineties. There are many analog reissues of Boss pedals, but somehow a 303 is out of the question. If I total all that I have spent on either direct copies or “heavily inspired” synths/modules, then over the years I’ ve paid out over 2000 euros for Roland products not made by Roland. I can’t think of another industry where such a situation could exist.

      1. I kind of like Roland’s bloody-mindedness. They absolutely *refuse* to simply reissue their old synths, no matter how much money they could make

        When they first announced the JD-XA, the presentation started with a discussion about the Jupiter-8. They really thought they were delivering a modern version of what they delivered with the JP-8 – and from Roland’s point of view, they were! That’s the key – they do have a particular point of view about both their innovative instruments *and* their repackaged sound boxes

        That’s what I think people get wrong about Roland. They’re quite happy to trade on their legacy – endlessly, for decades it seems. But they just won’t do exactly the same thing they’ve already done

        They’ve always been this way: remember, the TB-303 was meant to be for ordinary bands, it wasn’t there to invent a new kind of music. That’s why it didn’t sell – like the JD-XA, it was aimed at completely the wrong people, so it was rejected. So many times, they’ve had to discontinue devices cos they aimed them at the wrong people, they set them at the wrong price, or they simply misread what people were looking for

        But don’t you love that about them? They’ve had so many market failures, but they absolutely refuse to change how they do things

        We can get annoyed about them endlessly reusing their old sounds, but I think if they went down the “JP-8xl” route we would probably hate them even more

        I love Roland cos there’s just something *slightly* different about how they make their decisions, and they’re so infuriating that they’ve made a lifelong fan out of me

        1. No I don’t love that about them.
          Their job is to give musicians products that they want, at respectable price points, and that they may not know that they want, but they are failing in that first objective. Over the last few decades people have had to shell out huge amounts of money to buy second-hand Roland analogue gear, when Roland could have just reissued that gear. Very clearly the demand never abated.
          I believe it’s some sniffy corporate principle, afaik unvoiced anywhere, that has prevented them from reissuing their synths from yesteryear. I hope Uli sells billions of dollars’ worth of Roland clones, to stick one in their eye, and ha wouldn’t it be funny if Behringer bought Roland as a result.

      2. I own a few Roland synths – Alpha Juno 2, JX8P, and my favorite, a JX3P with the Kiwitechnics “Matrix” mod, so it’s not as though I am a partisan against the company. But I feel that the last ORIGINAL digital synth they made was the V-synth, and that was over 20 years ago. Roland management seem to have become very arrogant, so I am grateful that Behringer have stepped in.

  4. This is a subjective comment on my part: The prices of 40-year-old Jupiter 8s are ridiculous.
    I can afford it but would much rather spend that kind of money elsewhere.

    https://reverb.com/marketplace?query=roland jupiter-8 61-key synthesizer&referer=related_search

    For $1500 or less, putting a new JT-16 in my Cart and then proceeding to Checkout is far better than spending over ten times more on a synth that was built four decades ago and would cost an arm and a leg to service when something goes wrong.

    1. For 1 million bucks you can buy a giant diamond… It would be a big jewel. It would be super sparkly.

      Or you can spend a million bucks to get a million hot dogs.

      Do you get it? Seems like a reasonable analogy for this context

  5. I just read this thread and have some thoughts. First, I am a huge fan of what Uli is doing with his company. I own the Poly-D and it’s amazing. It sounds huge and gives me that Moog feel. Is it a Moog? No. Sound as good? That’s subjective but probably not. I also own the Solina and VC-340. I love stringers and they both have that classic vibe you can only get with cheesy divde down technology and that gooey modulation. I can’t afford to own a bunch of vinrtage gear because it Second, I am a huge Roland fan. I own the Fantom 7 EX. It’s my main board in an 80’s cover band and it delivers. The Model expansions and ACB expansions are incredible. Both glorified soft synths but to my ears they sound amazing. The real thing? Probably not but that’s again subjective. Whether Behringer is ethical or not about straight up ripping off old ideas because the patents have expired is irelevant. We want recreations of the classic old synth and most of us don’t have 10K and a close by technician to work on it when it breaks down. I will continue to support the Big 3 as well as buy Behringers clones.
    Fantom 7 EX
    Roland Juno DS88
    Roland JP-8000
    Yamaha MODX7
    Korg Triton 61 classic
    Behringer Poly-D
    Behringer Solina
    Behringer VC-340
    Kurtzweil K2600

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *