is my juno G radio quality

[M BOT]

Is the three band master compressor good enough to make a radio ready tune or do i need more.
is my juno G able to make commercial releases on it's own or do i really need a computer for softsynths etc.i want to pump the night clubs with my music but i don't know if my juno G is release quality.please give advice.do you make commercial radio songs with your fantoms or do you need better quality gear like nord lead and access virus.

[jblock]

Well, certainly for gigging, the sound is more than adequate. I'm sure I'll get disagreements here, but I the sound out of the Juno G is certainly studio quality. I've used both the Fantom S and the XP50 on their own to produce commercial CD releases, and to these ears the G sounds just as good. Of course some mastering on the back end couldn't hurt.

jonathan
http://www.synthblock.com

[producer1]

The truth is that any sound can be radio quality if mixed and mastered.Only Hit songs are going to be radio ready regardless what it was recorded on.The Juno G is more than qualified to do everything inside the workstation if you know what you are doing.I played the Juno G and loved it.The Bass sounds alone inspired me.If you can make Hit songs,the Juno G is a great start.

Producer1

[Artemiy]

Juno-G features the same quality sound engine as in the Fantom-X series which is used in top studios and by top artists. So the answer is yes of course.

[Diametro]

Actually, I'd say 'no,' strictly speaking, the Fantoms, Juno-G are not 'radio ready.' But then again, you could argue but a few synths out there fit that bill.

The difference -- I understand -- between excellent synth sounds -- like the Fantom X by iteself -- and the very, very best ones you may hear on professionally produced tracks are the effects units they are chained to -- generally expensive ones that cost as much or more than a Juno-G itself.

Many would say you can get a better sound from a cheap old keyboard with a great effects unit than a brand new expensive board.

Not to mention the production techniques as well that separate the bedroom producers from what actually gets played on the radio.

Also, I think many top producers use softsynths and softsamplers, which oftentimes produce a better sound than something like a Fantom. However, for people who play live (where pure sound considerations aren't as important), being MIDIed to a laptop isn't a terrible attractive idea for many reasons.

So you may want to look into a high-quality effects unit. I know that's eventually going to be an avenue I travel down. Many people have great things to say about the Sherman Filterbank.

Personally, I think the Fantoms are more live performance instruments than flat-out studio pieces ... That's how I use mine ... though, of course, I record with mine as well with great results (to my ears).

But I don't think I'd worry too much about that at this point. Just learn your board, how to edit patches, how to play it, and make some great music!



. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Roland Fantom X7, Alesis Fusion 6HD, Novation X/A-Station 25, Alesis Micron

[M BOT]

Diametro,would you say that the alesis fusion sounds better than my juno G,should i buy a fusion as well,how easy is it to use,if you had a choice of only one keyboard would you buy the fantom or the fusion.

[Diametro]

It depends on what you're looking for ...

In general, I think the Fusion compares very well, but I'm going to give the edge to the Fantom/Juno-G ...

(Keep in mind, I snagged my Fusion for $750 and bought it very much as an "away" board so I wouldn't have to rip my main setup apart every time ... as well as its sonic capablities.)

Many people buy workstations/ROMplers for what they call "bread-and-butter" sounds -- brass, guitars, pianos, organs, strings, etc. -- things that you just can't get on other boards that may focus more exclusively on synth sounds (like a Nord Lead, Waldorf Q, Virus, Alesis Ion, Novation X-Station, etc. etc.) Those machines just can't/won't do those sounds.

For those acoustic-type sounds, I think the Fantom/Juno-G scores better than the Fusion ... These sounds, I think, take a lot of care to create, and I think Roland has done a great job with that -- and then there's the SRX cards which invariably take you to another level.

The Fusion's B+B sounds are good -- and more importantly for me, a great contrast to the Roland sounds -- but where the Fusion shines, IMO, are its synth sounds and synthesis types - which use real programming instead of using samples -- and some of the specific features of the board -- 8-track SIMULTANEOUS hard drive recording, for example.

Also, many of the samples on the Fusion come from disparate sources that give it a character very unlike a Roland ROMpler. I'm speaking of the free Hollow Sun sounds they've been releasing periodically, and they are quite fantastic.

HOWEVER ...

I DON'T THINK YOU NEED A FUSION ... Despite everything I've said about Fantom X/Juno-G comparisons, the G is still a sweet board. It's got a ton to offer, and a gazillion features to learn.

My advice is to really get to know your G. Record with it. Make some songs.

The problem with loading up on various synths is that quite often one only gets a superficial understanding of their synths ... They call it G.A.S. (Gear Acquisition Synrome), and it's real. Beware. So many people in the game get caught up in being gear collectors instead of actually USING the synths they own ...

... and keep in mind that EVERYTHING you learn about the G will be applicable to other boards -- except for a few terms that Roland for some reason decided to re-name -- but the general thrust is that all the basics of subtractive synthesis are there.

My only caveat about NOT getting a Fusion -- or any other different synth for that matter -- is that I'm a big believer in sound texture and dimensionality. And no matter how great a synth is, your recordings are going to sound somewhat FLAT if its the source of ALL your sounds, IMO.

You may want to experiment with this concept.

Do an all Juno-G song. Then do one with the Juno-G and a good softsynth -- if you have one, or download one -- there's a ton. Even though I'm not a big fan of softsynths at the moment, I bet you'll find the interaction and play between the two sound sources more satisfying.

To use a carnal metaphor, it's like the difference between mastrubating or having sex -- or if MANY synths are involved -- an orgy. I'll be the first to admit you do lose a certain amount of intimacy as the number increases, but you get the point ...

If you decide your Juno-G needs a real hardware friend, I'd suggest getting a VA (virtual analog) first, and perhaps something with a lot of knobs and sliders for easy programming. The Alesis Ion is a good choice there ... I would definately consider going used here as you'll get a lot moe bang for your buck, and even VAs several years old will essentially do whatever the "latest and greatest" are claiming today ...

Do some research ... If you're serious about synths ... this is only the beginning ...

Enjoy.



. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Roland Fantom X7, Alesis Fusion 6HD, Novation X/A-Station 25, Alesis Micron

[sambasevam]

A.R.Rahman has used the Fantom S in TONS of places in his new albums. Google search his name and you'll learn that he's one of the most wanted music directors in india.

Considering that the Juno G has the same sampleset as the Fantom S + more, i'd say, YES, it does have radio quality sounds.



---------------------------------------------------------------
If at first you dont succeed, then skydiving is definitively not for you.

[peterned]

"radio quality" music is not just about rigging up some synths and hitting the record button. You can buy all the synths in the world, from romplers via VAs to vintage analog ones; crappy mixing and mastering will kill anything

Also, this so called professional sound is often nothing more than cranked up volumes to the point of (or beyond) clipping, compressed to death. Wiki even features a page on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war

[Diametro]

Yeah, but that Indian artist probably uses specialized hardware effects and whatnot on it as well ... so perhaps I'm being a bit dogmatic in what radio-ready means ...

but in the way the original poster suggested, a Juno-G and that's it, I must say again "no."

But then as I wrote before ... that would eliminate alot of other synths as well that are used in "radio-ready" recordings.

In the end, it's NOT what what you use ... it's how you use it AND what else you use it with.



. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Roland Fantom X7, Alesis Fusion 6HD, Novation X/A-Station 25, Alesis Micron

[M BOT]

see,this is what i mean,if i will only use a juno G as the only source of my music,will it sound flat or does it really just depend on how the hell i mix with it and if i've got a listenable groove or do i absolutely have to have another sound source for depth and variation.
Diametro! can i do it just with the juno G if it's a good groove or do i need extra gear to make it to the airwaves.

[sambasevam]

The indian artist I was talking about has a Euphonix console with PTHD, Logic and whatnot, so YES, he would process it thru his effects, but if you listen to the sound, it doesnt sound overly processed. When it sits in a mix, it sounds just right, ya know what i mean?



---------------------------------------------------------------
If at first you dont succeed, then skydiving is definitively not for you.

[Diametro]

M BOT,

I'm by no means a guru, but I would tend to think for many reasons somebody writing hit songs on the radio is going to have more than a Juno-G.

Generally, hit songs are recorded in high-dollar studios with a plethora of synths, extremely talented musicians and lots of other stuff, too.

Which isn't to say you won't get there based solely on the strength of your Juno-G produced grooves ... anything is possible, and I admire your drive ...

So man, if you're heading for the radio, let me do a re-mix for you ...



. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Roland Fantom X7, Alesis Fusion 6HD, Novation X/A-Station 25, Alesis Micron

[da-man]

M BOT
My humble opinion and answer would be yes and no.
YES
It will surely get you a decent quality song provided you mix and pan it well. Remember that audio producers cut a lot of stuff out (that bands and artists want ) inorder to get a cleaner sound.

I am very happy with my mixes and most people don't notice that it is not radio quality. (I'm using an x8 and onboard mastering) However I play the songs through mp3 players, portable stereos and bigger stereos to know how to mix the sound to get a happy medium for small speakers and larger speakers etc... BUT I know -even if others don't know that they are not radio quality and I push every song up to its max before clipping using the faders and the mastering section.

NO
Songs you hear on the radio are produced using gear that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars and the people using that gear are highly trained. Most recording studios take digital info and run it through analog processors to warm it and expand it. Most radio songs are mega compressed to get maximum volume.

[M BOT]

i want to at least make it to a community radio station that pumps out dance music but it looks like commercial radio will be harder unless i go to a studio to get it mastered through an analog valve compressor or preamp and then finish it with WavesL3 multi maximizer to severely pump up the levels and run the phase linear 5 band master eq over it,that should bring it up to scratch,so thanx for the advice guys.