I didn't think it would be this different. The PG-8X sounds way closer to the 8P than the Zenology version.

 

Many of the Zenology presets sound like they use higher detune amounts and lower filter cutoff than the hardware.
Anyway, the difference doesn't sound like the Zenology version could eally emulate the original JX.
Thanks for the comparison!

 

If you want a true JX8P emulation, Free PG8X is the one.
I had a JX8P and I can tell it's almost the same.
I haven't tried the zenology version yet.

PG8X : https://sites.google.com/site/mlvst0/

 

Ehhh... Hardware is MUCH BETTER. Zenology is similar, but no more....

 

listen guys: i own several classic including a jupiter 8 . define better please?
i did challenging people who thought they knew and they all failed to pick a plugin over the real deal in a mix situation.

1) the Zenology is not meant to be a fully on 1 to 1 , its an jack of all trades . so if you would compare it do it with dedicated software vs hw.
2) No Two classic analogs sound the same either; my friends jupiter , juno and jx8p sounds different then mine.
3) do we compare all the sampled and software pianos used today in music vs a real piano? no

4) move on and make music... oh btw i love behringers even if i have the originals ( i don't like to call it the real deal)

 

Last edited: Nov 11, 2021

PG8X is incredibly close, but I've heard that people say the LFO is slightly different. Have you heard this difference?

(comments section talks about it)

 

Yes, it's true, there is a very slight difference, not only the lfo. But from the real thing, there will always be differences.

 

Hardware definitely superior to Zenolgy.

Until Roland discovers how to accurately reproduce the underlying character of hardware synths, Zenology will always be an approximation. There is something lacking for sure in the response & tonal character.

The hardware D50, which a digital based synth, has a richer tone than the Roland software counterpart(s).

 

Last edited: Nov 11, 2021

I spent about a year lusting over the JX-8P mainly because of the PG-8X and how awesome it sounded, so I thought the actual hardware would be extra warm, extra phat, extra all that because it's HARDWARE and we all know hardware always wins vs software, so when I finally scored a JX-8P, first thing I did was compare it to PG-8X, and I didn't hear the hardware difference....I remember my jaw literally dropping at the realization that the free PG-8X sounded exactly like the JX-8P and for a moment I questioned my purchase.

 

I've had them side by side and the plugin is excellent. However, take a closer listen in particular to the brass and bass patches and you will find a big difference, the vst sounds static and less fat and the pads on the hardware have more movement, pianos a bit sweeter and warmer. You could fool a casual listener. I could live with just the plugin if I had to. To my ears the PG8 sounds closer to the real thing than the Zenology version, I was hoping they would release an ACB version tbh but the extra poly is useful. I take it when you said for a moment you questioned your purchase, you have since realised the hardware is nicer sounding or are you selling?

 

When you A/B them there are some differences - they're slight, but you can hear the "hardware-ness". Keeping it not really for the sound, but because I just like hardware, it looks cool, and I can program it from my desk using PG-8X (the JX is about 6 ft from me). I got it for a really good price, but if it ever crapped out on me, I wouldn't get a replacement. I'd be completely satisfied using PG-8X.

What I was going to do though, was get Roland's new JX-08 - and I say "WAS" because apparently it's based on the Zenology 8P. I thought it was going to be all new tech and sound just like the real JX-8P so having a newer backup 8P really interested me, but not getting it if it sounds like Zenology.

 

Yes, it's extremly close, until you plug it directly to an amp and big speakers, (opposed to a Digital Audio Sound Card) . The JX8P have much more low end. But if you use it only into digital world, you barely hear the difference.

 

That's interesting:
PG-8X (which is free) is much closer to the original hardware than Roland's own Zenology.

 

I rated your post funny, not in a bad way. It is funny how Martin made this freeware VSTi incredibly good, as opposed to Roland.

However, I find Zenology a really interesting synth and I like to use it and program it. Better than their other Roland Cloud offerings, especially their analogue emulations. I still think they sound better than Arturia's, though.

When it comes to 808 and 909, D16's 808 and 909 have more parameters... some rather important ones. Sound can always be enhanced with hardware or plugins. Drumazon and Nepheton are great. Hell, even LuSH-101 and their 303 emus are great. There's a lot in the mix and how you use plugins and your hardware.

I guess what I wanted to say is that authenticity is not that important if the sound and the track sounds right... you get my drift?

Just the other day I got slightly stoned with one of my clients and we started philosophising... He is a very successful musician, actually, and we came to the good old [Quincy Jones'] conclusion - if it sounds good - it is good. Also, 99% of the people won't notice any difference between hardware or software synths. They just listen. So Quincy Jones' proverb is one to stick to.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Nov 11, 2021

That's always the way I listen and approach supposed emulations. Consider them as "inspired by" rather than exact reproductions.