Roland Juno-106

Its all right there and easy to use. The faders just make sense and it doesn't include anything out of the ordinary. Manual isn't necessary if you have ever used synths and understand what everything does.

Nothing too great here. No velocity or aftertouch. It had great midi functions for when it was made, and it is somewhat unfair to compare the features to newer synths. Unison mode is nice.

You buy a juno for he sound and it is a great addition to any set up. I'm not sure what makes it sound so good, it just does. Great for pads and basses and I love to sub-octave and noise generators. Great 80's.

This is the problem that you have probably heard of. The dead voice chips. You can get replacement chips, but I have heard mixed review. I knew about this problem but decided to buy it anyways because it just sounds so good.

Not sure, haven't had to use it yet.

I got this synth for a great price ($250) and if it got stolen I would buy another at the regular problem. Greats sounds but I am dreading the day that the voice chip dies. If these synths didn't have that problem then it would have gotten a 10.

Much said already, I bought it largely because of the reviews here - indeed an ideal synth, great presets, instantly tweakable. Because of all parameters just physically layed in front of you, ideal playability. Doesn't get any easier. Only thing is that when selecting a new patch, the slides won't move showing the positions for each parameter like on a modern MC808 - so there may be a sudden jump when you start tweaking a patch. But no complaints - it's an 80s synth...

No velocity sensitivity, which to me is quite nice & simple in your studio as I already had a sensitive master keyboard. For some sounds it makes more sense and adds tightness to go without vel sens. Keyboard itself is typical Roland, nice playing keyboard

You know the sounds - they're everywhere... Been intensely used throughout pop music since Frankie Goes to Hollywood, Duran Duran, George Michael (typical wobbling noise fx in "I want your Sex"), and not to forget a large part of Madonna / "Ray of Light"

There's a certain warm character about it, it has some kind of 'heart'... And it's a littlebit fuzzy compared to the sharpness of current VA synths I have. It's analog like hell and a great base for working and adding some "real life soul" synth to your tracks

I bought one cheaply, from a typical ignorant owner advertising it with symptoms that sounded to me like the voicechip problem. When visiting him, first thing I did was testing it in diagnostic mode. This made the problem worse to his dismay, but I was satisfied and took it. Ordered a replicant chip and had it replaced in no time by a vintage synth repairer (I located and spoke to him before buying the 106). Altogether a good deal, repair was cheap too.
Other than that, no problems whatsoever. Never read about other problems. Apart from the voicechip, imo overall build quality is superb for a machine over 20yrs old

no opinion

Excellent synth. Definately a keeper. I like using it towards the end of an all-digital track, giving it some soul, taking the track to a new level. Although the sounds in isolation are not always impressive, somehow in the mix they're giving me goosebumps

Very easy to use, it's a breeze to edit the patches. Manual not really necessary, but nice to have for reference.

Six voice polyphony, 61 keys, no aftertouch, no velocity, 128 patch memory, good MIDI implementation for age, no appregiator, built in chorus(noisy but still good). Like has been said before, you get this for the sound, not the features.

Awesome pads, basses and leads. Total 80s goodness. The 106 sounds great, it's not a sampler, it's a real synth. The Juno can be smooth as butter, or as dirty as you please. The unison mode is cool, and I like the "noisy", but excellent chorus.

Here's the main issue with an otherwise legendary piece of gear, it is well known that several 106s shipped with lousy voice chips, however, many did not as well, and several that did were repaired. Mine works fine, and I've played many others that did as well. If you are savvy with electronics, replacing a dead chip won't be difficult for you, it can get expensive quickly, so you are better off finding one without this issue. Otherwise, it's pretty well made. I trust mine, but I don't think I'd take it anywhere for fear of accident, loss, or theft.
Get's a 5 for chance of bad 80017 ic chips.

You can download the manual in .pdf from Roland, otherwise I wouldn't bother contacting them. Plenty of 3rd party support though, including new voice chips, so I give it a 7.

I give it a solid 9. The 106 is not the best 'board ever, but it is a damn good one if you are into the sounds of it's era. Lot's of pros used Junos, and you can hear them on many albums. I wish it had the appregiator the other Junos had, and velocity sensitive keys, other than that, it's still a great synth, and I love it. I'd be devastated if anything happened to it, I'd have to replace it. Was expensive, but worth it to me.

if it gets any easier then this i havent played it yet. And thats pretty much across the board. even as a midi keyboard its still easier then alot of others because the channel select is in plain view.

I dont want to be overly redundant everyone says the same its pretty weak on paper. but for whatever reason it sounds beautiful. if you love music from the 80's at all its gonna hit a certain spot with you. i have a handful of synths that can or are supposed to emulate this. jv-1080 to A station, but theres something going on in the frequency of the highs and lows and mids that just get everything right in what this synth is best at. youll spnd forever trying to get it right on another synth and get it in less then a minute on this one. i think it has something to do with the hybrid build of it. for me its mainly the pads you can do.

well i explained this above. though in alot of ways the alpha juno series blows away the 106. i have a alpha and the bass is my favorite of all synth ive ever owned. though ive owned a moog something about the phat overworldly bass you get from it is incredible to me. its not normal by any standards it definetly doesnt sound like it even comes close to a acuostic bass instrument but it was bord to make electronic music. alot like the 808. the 106 chorus is good about as simple as it gets 1 or 2?

heres where not alot is said overall in these reviews and its kinda sad. a large portion of 106's possibly all of them have voice chips that if havent gone bad will. if you wikipedia the 106 it says something like one of the techs that designed it said that the first batch well, the first ones are all most likely dead by now. but that there should be a good amount or at least some out there that are fine and will die someday as all things do but not in the emediate future. i hope thats true because its quite expensive to replace all the chips like about 400+ alone. for this reason alone i will never purchace another 106.

none existant roland stopped producing parts for this synth when i was a kid and im almost 30!

well i picked mine up on ebay because i had never seen a juno for less then 500 let alone 300 bucks. i always wanted one as a teen and had the internet been more dvailable then i wouldve found out about the bad chip issue. im deciding if i want to keep it or not. its gonna most likely be a yes but if my chips ever do die it will get a proper funeral. point blank theres is a whole handful of synths that came out in the 80's with a goal of being anything near the juno and had they been sucessful you wouldnt be reading this. because there is only one juno 106, period. however if your not an experienced musician or know a thing or two about electronics stay away. because your odds of getting a bad juno are not in your favor. and for what its worth for you a korg poly 800 is close enough without putting you in danger of blowing possibly 600 bucks down the shit. even if it sounds incredible whats the use if it doesnt work. by the way thats what they go for nowadays usually 600. i noticed nobody ever puts that just the rediculious small amount they pay for it. by the way juno for 75? yeah stop lying guy.

Nothing to it by todays standards, very simple architecture, what you see is what you get
That said it takes a while to find its sweet spot
And a good understanding of subtractive synthesis and modulations goes a long way

Again, very simple, on paper doesnt look very impressive next to 16 Voice mega analogues with 4 LFOs 3 Envelopes, multiple modulations etc
No velocity or aftertouch etc no sequencer
The main "feature" is the sound, so for me that its best feature

Well I sold one a few years back and then missed it, so this is my second one
You get single oscillator, single envelope, 1 LFO, Saw and Pulse Oscillator Analogue sounds. You know basses, bleeps, pads, brass, leads, sweeps, crunches, crashes, thuds.
Sounds like any other simple synth on paper but the Juno 106 just hits the spot for certain sounds for me
I cant get these sounds anywhere else
I have a ton of fancy synths, Andromeda, Dopefer A-100, DSI Evolvers you name it
This synth hits some emotional nerve in my brain
Maybe its because some of my favourite music was made using this synth
I mean, how else do you judge how "good" something sounds?
It has a certain tone or something I really like
On the down side the range of sounds is limited because of the simple architecture - hence the 8 score

Well it very old and still works perfectly
Seem to be plenty of spare parts from dead 106s and backup around

Roland here still service this thing
They cannibalise old ones for parts

Well it wont blow you away with its feature set
I have plenty of synths with much more complexity and power
But none sound like this
For same reason I love the SH101 and SIDstation very simple, but unique sound
This has character and presence
It speaks a certain musical language
True, some of it is nostalgia for me, it reminds me of sounds of happy times.
But I still use it in new ways today
Mix it in with the new sounds
Its so cheap anyway its not like Im starving to afford one, its a gift
Only problem for me though is space, the dreaded software synths give you so much sound variety in such a small space.
The only reason I would sell this is I just cant move in my studio for all these keyboards
But for now Im keeping it.

Ok, this synth has gotten some un-deserving bad reviews as of late. While I personally like the Juno 60 better the 106 is no second rate synth. It may not have modern features, but it does have great analog sound. It may be a beginners synth, but it has the controls and ability to have many uses in the right hands.

Its really simple simple six voice synth. No velocity sensitivity or arpeggiator here. It's a bare bones kind of synth. However, it gives you enough to create interesting and unique sounds that can be edited with external effects. Its not a all in one machine, but gives you tools to build a foundation.

This synth is great. Yeah its limited, but I use a Korg ES-50 Lambda often to get sounds ( Thats limited! ). The sound is great, as said before its not a "punchy" as the 60, but it still is great. Obviously some who have reviewed this only did so by using headphones or midi. Try it through a fender tube amp and you will hear it come to life. Also do not think twice about using external effects on it. I use a Electro-harmoinix big muff and Memory-man delay on mine always. The key is that the Juno 106 gives a good interface and raw sound that is great to work with. Like a lot of older synths you need to get creative, but when you do the sounds are well worth it.

The juno 106 provides a great base. It has a simple yet extensive controls and can create many sounds. However, this synth is not plug and play by any means.

I have never had a problem with mine, but I have heard many horror stories. Most deal with poor voice chips. Supposedly there are still second market voice chips that sound good, but I have never used them so i can't say anything for certain.

This synth is great for beginners who want to get creative and learn TRUE synth techniques. THis thing will not hold your hand and will force you to be creative. It has plenty of sounds and uses so it will not be something you will ever out grow. One must remember though that to get the best sounds you may need to use other pieces of equipment.

This is an easy to use, very basic subtractive synth. Classic analog synth layout. Patches are OK, but a lot of them sound alike due to the limited tonal capabilities of the Juno 106. It is easy to edit and save patches, and the manual is ok.

Polyphony is six voices, but remember that this thing was made in the early 80's. The keyboard action is typical synth-weighted, plastic organ feel (read "poop"). Built in effects are limited to chorus, no reverb or other signal processing is avilable. Interestingly, the June 106 sports an analog port for connecting to a tape deck in order for users to save patches to analog recording tape! This is done through a built in modem that is used to encode the digital memeory of the 106 into *sound* that can be recorded onto tape (or sent over a voice-grade phone circuit). Now you youngsters out there don't even know what I'm talking about do you? This thing was made in the days when vinyl records dominated the music industry (ask your parents). It was thoughtful for Roland to include a way to save your patches (onto cassette tape for example), but MAN, talk about cheesiness! On a more serious note (har har), after the purchase I almost immediately hated the fact that it doesn't respond to keyboard velocity, so every note plays at the same volume irrespective of whether you played it soft or hard. This might just be the last keyboard manufactured on the planet Earth without velocity response. Connecting via MIDI to a velocity sensitive controller doesn't help either, because the Jumo 106 simply ignores velocity information. This has a real limiting effect on its use, e.g. OK for some organ-like sounds, but poor for sounds requiring wide dynamic ranges such as strings, percussion, etc.

I really love the Harmony Central reviews, and they have reliably guided my instrument purchases over the last several years. But I have to respond to the following, which is from a review I read a couple of reviews below:

"Not as good as the famous Casio PT-30 but the Juno 106 sounds much better than the Minimoog, because it uses only one oscillator"

WTF??? Hello!?! OK, I'll have whatever you're smoking pal. It sounds good "because it uses only one oscillator" ?!?!?!?!???!!! Seriously, even mentioning this thing on the same page as the venerable Minimoog is an ignorant thing to do. This is an entry level synth with a very thin and sonically limited palatte. It is not, repeat not, a serious contender in the world of analog synths, and certainly not even worth one note of a Minimoog's power. I have used the 106 a lot to fatten other sounds, especially basses. However overall its sound is very uninspired and limited. A good first synth - if it were 1985, but it's not.

Somebody below said something like "don't pay more than 700 Euro's" - hey, please call me immedaitely, you can have mine for EU 699! No? How about EU69? Alright, give me fifty bucks and a case of beer!

Seem reliable. Note however that it uses a non-standard power cord, which if lost means you can't play it! Could be a bad surprise at a gig!

Don't know. Never called.

No, I would not replace the Juno 106. I bought it new in the early 1980's. I was torn between this one and the Jupiter, but thought I'd like this one becuase the Jupiter was twice as much - WRONG! That's what I get for being cheap, one of the worst mistakes in my instrument purchasing career. This thing was hugely popular, because it was a low end, polyphonic synth that was well in the price range of amateurs. So Roland sold 100's of thousands of Juno 106's. But only because of the 106's low price point. In today's world, you wouldn't consider this thing for much becuase it's sounds are so one dimensional. To explain what I mean by this, in some ways, the timbale sound resembles the organ sound, which resembles the string sound, which... Of course this is a bit of an exaggeration, but not without a point. The 106 is so limited in its ability to generate sound that it is a very skinny one-trick pony.

This is a great synth for your first "analog". Even though the oscillators are digitally controlled, most of the basic parameters of the older VCO analogs are here. The Junos are probably some of the easiest to program. Once again, a great introduction to analog.

This synth is limited by the single DCO, but the sounds that it is capable of are great. The PWM and Sub-oscillator are very handy in thickening the sounds. Also, the chorus is GREAT, but a little too noisy, unless there is a lot going on in the mix of the song you are using the synth on. This would be a 10 if there were multi-oscillators.

Nice basses and a couple of decent organs. But the real star here is the strings and basses. Easy to get Memorymoog-like strings, or even some Jupiter-like strings and pads via the PWM. The chorus does wonders for the sound here, too. But you would probably do better with an outboard chorus that's not so noisy, unless you want that slow, pulsating hiss.

I just got this synth on ebay and it looked like it had been buried in someone's backyard when I got it (the keys were brown), so I was a bit skeptical about it even working at all. I cleaned it up (back to white) and turned it on and there were no problems. Although there were no major scratches or parts missing/broken, it was clear that the synth had not been taken care of. Nonetheless, it still sounds great. So, even though I just got it, I'm gonna say it's a good one, because all the voices work and I played it for about 4 hours straight with no problems the first night.

I've never had to deal with Roland. I've heard some good and bad, though.

I would definitely replace this synth if necessary. I'm sure it's the best $300 I've spent on an instrument. It's a nice piece of nostalgia for me. I would recommend it to someone who wanted to add some analog pads to score music. And, as always, the dance/techno stuff like William Orbit is great on this synth, too.

So simple a chimpanzee could do it standing on its head. You'd have to be brain damaged not to fix it boy.

Waves pulse square saw, only one OSCs + one Sub, two Filters lpf reso + static hpf 4 Pole, only one LFO triangle, only one ENV.

If you like string sounds you have heard a million times before, go for it. If you'd like to make e.g. a bass sound, you???re not going to get it from this one, or any other half-decent sound. This is without doubt the most undeservedly hyped up synth in the history of synthesisers. You will get very little for you money, use it on something better.

It Japanes/German it is solid.

no idea

I had mine for two years, can't comprehend why I kept it that long, since then I moved on to better things the sweet sounding and totally unreliable Ensoniq, phantomless complicated but rewarding and dead solid Yamaha's, bassy Korg???s, intuitive and harsh Quasimidi's and brilliant Anyware Instruments. I have had twelve synths up through the years the worst were all from Roland.

a bit hard for the beginner due to the many possibilities which this synth offers. On the other hand, after some experience you start to appreciate it. Maybe not so good for beginners, too many sliders.

The range of sounds is tremendous.

It is definitely a 10. A little complicated for the beginner due to the many sliders, but on the other hand, a universe of sounds is possible. Not as good as the famous Casio PT-30 but the Juno 106 sounds much better than the Minimoog, because it uses only one oscillator. Get one before they disappear from the market. They are the secret of success and used in many Top studios. Also much better than Juno 6 and Juno 60, they sound too vintage and have too much punch. The strings on the 106 are famous.

never had a problem, built like a tank, some plastic though.

super support from Roland, but is costly.

... a true classic. Don't pay more than 700 Euro for it.