Small keyboard like Roland Juno DS61 versus Yamaha MX61

[analogman1]

Hey Folks,

I’m looking for a quick setup for a lot of gigs where I don’t want to bring my computer and run VST synths etc.

lately we’ve been doing a lot of quick shows and the setup time is just not there…

I use an Electro 5D for organs, pianos etc. 

so the top board would be for strings, brass and other sounds of that sort. Even synth pads etc.  the more the variety and quality, the better…
I’d like to stick to the price range of these two (or possibly less, if i went with the Yamaha then probably MX49 instead).  
any options are greatly welcome! I would like to purchase ASAP.  
thanks in advance,

Tom

[Baldwin Funster]

I like the DS. it's strength would be strings and pads. There are lots of horns but many go back to the 80s and 90s. But there are a couple good ones like brassx. There are some good synths too but if you wanted to build a sound from scratch you should know there are no oscillators, just waveforms. Over 2000 waveforms and programming is very deep.VERY DEEP.

 

I don't know anything about the yamaha except about 10 people will come on here to say the yamaha is better. Most of these have spent 10 minutes or less on the Roland. 

[Aynsley Green]

Had a Yamaha MX61 backlined on a gig recently and it was terrible. Low-end Japanese gear have rubbish actions and build quality, unfortunately.

Spend your money once and buy something that will last.

My Upper Board/Small Gig Rig these days is the Roland Fantom 06 - solid sounds, features, build quality and action. 15kg in a flight case - it's a good problem solver, and not that expensive.

 

[AnotherScott]

3 hours ago, Baldwin Funster said:

I like the DS. it's strength would be strings and pads. There are lots of horns but many go back to the 80s and 90s. But there are a couple good ones like brassx. 

You can also improve the horn selection by adding one of the free Roland expansions. They have one specifically for brass, though I'd probably select "Complete Orchestra" instead, which provides a good range of horns as well as other useful sounds (only one of these expansions can be loaded at a time, so you do need to choose).

 

35 minutes ago, Aynsley Green said:

Had a Yamaha MX61 backlined on a gig recently and it was terrible. Low-end Japanese gear have rubbish actions and build quality, unfortunately.

Spend your money once and buy something that will last.

My Upper Board/Small Gig Rig these days is the Roland Fantom 06 - solid sounds, features, build quality and action. 15kg in a flight case - it's a good problem solver.

I would give the Roland the edge in versatility, sonic variety, sound editability... but build quality seems about the same as the MX, action actually seems better on the MX (at least more even in response from the front of the key to the back), and at least out of the box, I think I'd prefer the strings and brass of the MX as well, though I haven't directly A/B'd them.

[Aynsley Green]

24 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

You can also improve the horn selection by adding one of the free Roland expansions. They have one specifically for brass, though I'd probably select "Complete Orchestra" instead, which provides a good range of horns as well as other useful sounds (only one of these expansions can be loaded at a time, so you do need to choose).

 

I would give the Roland the edge in versatility, sonic variety, sound editability... but build quality seems about the same as the MX, action actually seems better on the MX (at least more even in response from the front of the key to the back), and at least out of the box, I think I'd prefer the strings and brass of the MX as well, though I haven't directly A/B'd them.

 

Ostensibly it has the same samples as the Motif, maybe even some Montage stuff, but the MX sounded nothing like them.
Maybe crappy DACs or something, but it was lacking that Yamaha sheen.

[AnotherScott]

35 minutes ago, Aynsley Green said:

 

Ostensibly it has the same samples as the Motif, maybe even some Montage stuff, but the MX sounded nothing like them.
Maybe crappy DACs or something, but it was lacking that Yamaha sheen.

The "Motif XS-and-up" versions of these sounds can have two insert effects per sound instead of one as on the MX, and can include additional articulations, so there is at least that. Different velocity response to the keys could also impact the ease with which the higher velocity samples are triggered.

[drawback]

I test-drove a Fantom 06 and while I liked the sounds, sculptability, action, interface and portability, the polyphony was too limited for the multis I was trying to make. Still, it’s a very, very good all-purpose keyboard for smaller gigs by itself, or a top board for a larger setup.

[analogman1]

The Fantom 06 is pricewise very close to the Yamaha MODX6. 
Really didn’t want to go that high. 
Which would you folks choose if were between the Fantom and the MODX?

 

though, I’m leaning towards spending less money on the Juno or small Yamaha…

[drawback]

I've tried the MODX6 in a retailer. The sounds & interface are wonderful but the Fantom 06 has a better playing keyboard. 

[ProfD]

1 hour ago, analogman1 said:

The Fantom 06 is pricewise very close to the Yamaha MODX6. 
Really didn’t want to go that high. 
Which would you folks choose if were between the Fantom and the MODX?

 

though, I’m leaning towards spending less money on the Juno or small Yamaha…

For the intended purpose, I would recommend the Juno DS.  It's definitely more versatile than the MX. 

 

Also, as intended, it does not make sense to spend more money on a higher priced KB for minimal gains in terms of sounds and features.😎

[Aynsley Green]

5 hours ago, analogman1 said:

The Fantom 06 is pricewise very close to the Yamaha MODX6. 
Really didn’t want to go that high. 
Which would you folks choose if were between the Fantom and the MODX?

 

though, I’m leaning towards spending less money on the Juno or small Yamaha…

 

As the saying goes 'buy expensive once, or cheap twice'. Cheap gear really isn't worth it, trust me.

 

MODX has some great sounds and libraries, I definitely like the pianos better, but the action and build-quality still weren't up to par for me. And no real Hammond or VA synth!

 

The Fantom is a bit more expensive, but has all the features you'd expect of a workstation, and a decent action. The common sounds definitely require more spit-shine than the MODX, though.

[analogman1]

Yes. That’s why I’ve kept the Electro this long. And also why I use a Mac and MainStage.  
 

Quality gear always gives you the best bang for a buck. 
 

in this case, however, it’s for extra sounds when setup time and/or logistics don’t permit a full rig. 

[AnotherScott]

9 hours ago, drawback said:

I test-drove a Fantom 06 and while I liked the sounds, sculptability, action, interface and portability, the polyphony was too limited for the multis I was trying to make. 

I think the key to minimizing polyphony problems is in the selection of the sounds. For example, I think the SuperNATURAL and VA models use more polyphony than the "standard" rompler-style sounds. So they may be best used when you're playing only a couple of sounds at a time... but if you're developing complex multis with many sounds, you may be better off looking for a similar sound in the library of "standard" sounds. When you're playing lots of sounds, the increased authenticity of the "better" sounds may not be so noticeable, and you could be better off trading that for something "close enough" that doesn't impact polyphony as much. But this is not something I've worked with much.

 

9 hours ago, analogman1 said:

The Fantom 06 is pricewise very close to the Yamaha MODX6. 
Really didn’t want to go that high. 
Which would you folks choose if were between the Fantom and the MODX?

That's not an easy choice, they each have advantages. I think most acoustic instrument sounds are better on Yamaha (at least out of the box), and you can stack more effects, and it has an FM synth, it has better iPad integration, it has (third party) computer editor. The Roland makes it easier to edit sounds and create complex split/layer combinations, is better for tonewheel organ emulation and VA synth stuff, has more real-time controls, assignable and balanced outs, better drum programming/control, easier sample management, built-in Mainstage support... it all depends on your own priorities.

 

9 hours ago, drawback said:

I've tried the MODX6 in a retailer. The sounds & interface are wonderful but the Fantom 06 has a better playing keyboard. 

These things are always subjective. I actually prefer the MODX keys, I like the more solid landing and the more even response from front-to-rear.

[analogman1]

Scott, what type of MainStage support?

I’m sure any hardware keyboard would appear as a midi controller in MainStage. 
What’s different regarding the Roland and MainStage?

[AnotherScott]

1 hour ago, analogman1 said:

Scott, what type of MainStage support?

I’m sure any hardware keyboard would appear as a midi controller in MainStage. 
What’s different regarding the Roland and MainStage?

It's not about a hardware keyboard appearing as a MIDI controller in Mainstage, it's the reverse... Mainstage data appearing on the screen of the hardware keyboard. You see the Mainstage patches on the Roland screen as you navigate through them from the Roland. The knobs on the Roland are auto-mapped to Mainstage sound functions, and the mapping definitions appear on the screen of the Roland. See 3:41 in this video:

 

 

[analogman1]

Very cool, Scott, you’re the man!!!

[Fleer]

Have a look at the new Yamaha CK61. It’s pretty sweet. 

[analogman1]

Hi Fleer,

the Yamaha CK61. looks great! It just is pushing me into a higher price than I wanted to spend. 
 

had I decided to not use the computer/plug in route at all, then I’d consider a fully blown board like the Fantom/Modx/ etc or even a Kronos. 

but this is for a quick grab-n-go addition to my Electro. 
 

but the new Yamaha CK61 does look cool!