"Perhaps Joseph and Archeologist should join the group that is
disassembling the Juno chip.... Is there a group still making
technological advancements to the Juno? I don't believe so. Or they can
go on thinking that thier beloved Juno's are superior. I know better."
"anonymous"
Idiot - at which point did i claim the juno to be my "beloved"
instrument, and could you also maybe let me know ehre abouts i pointed
out that the Juno is superior...........
oh you can't because it didn't happen, maybe thats because what i wrote
was clarifying a point someone else had difficulty understanding.
I can't believe you wasted your time either, but learning to read may
help stop this in future.
Epiik Soul wrote:
> I can't believe I'm wasting time explaining this but here goes.......
>
> The Poly has 2 oscillators, the Juno only has 1.
> The Poly has 8 voices while the Juno has only 6.
> The Poly has 3 envelopes, the Juno has only 1.
> The Poly has a sequencer, the Juno does not.
> The Poly's voices can be doubled for an incredibly FAT 4 osc - 4 voice
> poly mode while the Juno tries to sound fat by adding chorus to it's
> single oscillator. Even if that worked, you can still add chorus on
> the Poly and blow the Juno away.
> The Poly Mk2 has a digital delay, the Juno does not.
> The Poly can be battery operated and is truly portable, it even has
> buttons for a strap if you are so inclined. The Juno is not and does not.
> (Score so far...... Poly 8 - Juno 0)
> Don't get me wrong, I like the Juno also.
> It has more keys and more patch memory.
> The Juno is so easy to program that a monkey could do it (probably why
> you like it) while a Poly takes knowledge, talent and skill (that you
> obviously lack)
> To state that the Juno is a superior instrument only illustrates your
> ignorance in such matters.
> To make one final point, the following is taken from the Vintage Synth
> Explorer website:
>
> "During the time of the Roland Juno series in the mid-80's, Korg
> offered the Poly-800. Comparable to the Juno and in many ways better,
> the Poly-800 is an 8 voice polyphonic analog synthesizer with 64
> memory patches and up to 50 editable parameters!"
> In closing, this group is composed of fans of a truly impressive
> musical instrument. Most synths are doomed to a rapid and inevitable
> technological obsolecence that the Poly has avoided. As an engineer,
> I'm a fan of the terrific job Korg did when designing this flexible
> little monster. As a musician, I'm still inspired by the sounds
> possible with it. I've wasted far too much time,but I'm hopeful that
> some very widely held misconceptions have been laid to rest.
> Perhaps Joseph and Archeologist should join the group that is
> disassembling the Juno chip.... Is there a group still making
> technological advancements to the Juno? I don't believe so. Or they
> can go on thinking that thier beloved Juno's are superior. I know better.
> "anonymous"
>
>
>
> *//*
> *//*
> *//*
> */archeologist <archeologist@...>/* wrote:
>
> I think the pointis very clear.
> The poly 800 is better due to pricing.
> Clearly if it was the same price as a Juno things would be different.
>
> Joseph Ralston wrote:
>
> > No, I don't see what you mean. Please explain what you
> > think the Poly 800 is better at than a Juno 106,
> > musically? I've owned them both and the difference is
> > black and white to me. The poly-800 is fun as hell to
> > hack with (due to it's low price). But hacking up
> > keyboards is not the same thing as making music, and
> > in that area, the JUNO does prevail heavily over the
> > poly-800.
> >
> > lanrosta
> >
> > --- Epiik Soul <electrohead2000@...
> <mailto:electrohead2000%40yahoo.com>
> > <mailto:electrohead2000%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
> >
> > > A Juno 106 for $200- is a bargain and I would snap
> > > it up.
> > > However, to say it is better in "every regard" is
> > > a fallacy.
> > > The Poly is cheaper.
> > > See what I mean?
> > > :)
> > >
> > >
> > > Joseph Ralston <voxdestrukt@...
> <mailto:voxdestrukt%40yahoo.com>
> > <mailto:voxdestrukt%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
> > > Shit, if you can find a JUNO 106 for less
> > > than $200
> > > bucks, then I'd recommend getting that instead
> > > anyways. The JUNO-106 far outweights the Poly800 in
> > > every regard. Or perhaps you meant some other JUNO?
> > >
> > > --- jure zitnik <kokoon@... <mailto:kokoon%40gmail.com>
> <mailto:kokoon%40mail.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > > > yeah i voted 100$ too. i mean.. i bought the
> > > > poly-800 for like 70$... in
> > > > perfect condition that is. with a case.
> > > >
> > > > jure
> > > >
> > > > On 5/24/06, Tim Bieniosek <tab27@...
> <mailto:tab27%40drexel.edu>
> > <mailto:tab27%40drexel.edu>>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What if you added a DB9 or DB25 port on the back
> > > > for an external knob box?
> > > > >
> > > > > The most I'd pay for a kit is $100. After that
> > > > you can just buy a Juno.
> > > > > (sacrilege!)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 24 May 2006, patrioticduo wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I did entertain the idea of replacing the
> > > seven
> > > > segment displays with
> > > > > > a 2x24 backlit LCD. But even that is too much
> > > to
> > > > spend.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > However, I am planning on putting an LCD
> > > > interface onto the retrofit
> > > > > > kit so that I can plug a display in and do
> > > > diagnostics with it. Also,
> > > > > > I have a funny feeling that I may have to use
> > > > the LCD to determine the
> > > > > > exact memory map used for all the parameters
> > > and
> > > > patch space use.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But the cost of the LCD would be too high for
> > > > any retrofit kit. I
> > > > > > mean, when you can pick up all sorts of much
> > > > higher powered
> > > > > > synthesizers for a few hundred bucks what
> > > would
> > > > the point of it all be?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This upgrade is 90% ROM and RAM. A few digital
> > > > pots will allow
> > > > > > controlling some mod's but I simply refuse to
> > > > entertain carving up the
> > > > > > keyboard, drilling holes and messing with the
> > > > external appearance.
> > > > > > This mod is going to be an internal upgrade.
> > > No
> > > > messing up a great
> > > > > > looking vintage keyboard.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I want mine to look like a Poly 800 for my
> > > > grandchildren.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:korgpolyex%40yahoogroups.com>
> > <mailtokorgpolyex%40yahoogroups.com>, Marcus
> > > Wilson
> > > > <JB@...> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Speaking of new features, one thing i was
> > > > thinking would be uber cool
> > > > > > > would be to actually display the parameter
> > > > info in the decal showing
> > > > > > > the parameters and ranges, and having
> > > up/down
> > > > switches under the up/
> > > > > > > down parameter switch area. As my own
> > > > experience is in membrane
> > > > > > > switches, getting the switch side of things
> > > is
> > > > pretty simple, its the
> > > > > > > control and the multiplex/demultiplex of the
> > > > parameter info display
> > > > > > > that got too hard.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Imagine seeing all of the parameters on the
> > > > poly displayed, and being
> > > > > > > able to tweak each one at will, instead of
> > > > needing to fumble thru the
> > > > > > > parameters one at a time
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > JB over
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 24/05/2006, at 3:19 PM, jure zitnik
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > if you're planning the digital pot - why
> > > not
> > > > replace the awkward up/
> > > > > > > > down buttons with a rotary encoder? i
> > > guess
> > > > it's an easy job!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > jure
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 5/23/06, patrioticduo
> > > <patrioticduo@...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > I'm trying to keep the scope within the
> > > > realms of sanity.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So I'm placing initial limits on the
> > > > hardware upgrade.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Required outcome: Upgrade the Poly 800 RAM
> > > > and ROM to support
> > > > > > > > additional CPU programming related
> > > > functions. A board will be
> > > > > > > > developed as part of a retrofit kit that
> > > > will plug into the existing
> > > > > > > > ROM socket. The card will have a 2764
> > > EPROM,
> > > > a 6264 RAM, a 74LS138
> > > > > > > > decoder.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Optional outcome: Provide the needed
> > > > hardware to integrate several
> > > > > > > > well established mod's (moog slayer,
> > > 12/24db
> > > > filter switch, etc)
> > > > > into
> > > > > > > > the CPU control and user programming
> > > system.
> > > > Thus, add a 74H174 (6
> > > > > bit
> > > > > > > > latch) and a digital potentiometer and
> > > other
> > > > chips as needed to
> > > > > allow
> > > > > > > > existing and future mod's to be controlled
> > > > by the CPU.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think it very unlikely that we'll run
> > > out
> > > > of CPU cycles handling
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > required outcomes. I think it possible
> > > that
> > > > we may run into CPU
> > > > > cycle
> > > > > > > > restrictions trying to satisfy the
> > > optional
> > > > outcomes.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If we do find that we run out of CPU
> > > cycles
> > > > then I'm hoping that
> > > > > I'll
> > > > > > > > know so much about the code that I can
> > > port
> > > > the whole thing to a PC
> > > > > > > > and release a virtual Poly 800 that will
> > > run
> > > > on your Linux box.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Mike H.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:korgpolyex%40yahoogroups.com>
> > <mailto:korgpolyex40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > > "austeritygirlone" <ziggystar@>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:korgpolyex%40yahoogroups.com>
> > <mailto:korgpolyex%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > > "patrioticduo" <patrioticduo@>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Keep up the good work! After you've
> > > > figured out how to controll
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > peripheral synthstuff from the cpu and
> > > > written a basic OS, that
> > > > > gets
> > > > > > > > > somethingn done I'm sure that other
> > > people
> > > > will join your efforts
> > > > > > > > > (like me). But of course doing this is a
> > > > major obstacle.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > And have you thought about replacing the
> > >
> > === message truncated ===
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com <http://mail.yahoo.com/>
> <http://mail.yahoo.com <http://mail.yahoo.com/>>
> >
> >
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >No virus found in this incoming message.
> >Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.0/368 - Release Date:
> 6/16/2006
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ring'em or ping'em. Make PC-to-phone calls as low as 1\ufffd/min
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman11/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39666/*http://voice.yahoo.com>
> with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman3/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39666/*http://messenger.yahoo.com>
> PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.1/369 - Release Date: 6/19/2006
>
>Message
Re: [korgpolyex] Re: Disassembly update - II
2006-06-20 by archeologist