Roland Super Jupiter MKS-80 Rev 4 Versus Rev 5

Posted on by

There’s quite a debate out there on the internets about the sound of the Roland Super Jupiter MKS-80 rev 4 versus rev 5. The one I’m testing at the moment is a rev 5. So I decided to see if I could match one of the rev 4 comparison sounds that I found posted on Gearslutz.com in this thread about the topic. I knew that I couldn’t match it exactly because on the unit I’m testing the tune knob isn’t functional and it does not respond to velocity. However, I thought it would be interesting to see how close I could come.

I tuned the instrument, awkwardly, with the pitch wheel in lieu of a functional tune knob. The main difference I hear is that in the rev 4 example the velocity is routed to the VCF, where in my example the VCF is re-triggered with the same intensity on each note since the velocity is not functional. Here are the examples so that you can be the judge. Compare the first phrase in “Rev 4 versus Rev 5” to “Rev 5 Reprogrammed”.

Rev 4 versus Rev 5 example from Gearslutz.com moderator Don Solaris:
Rev 4 versus Rev 5

My attempt to match the Rev 4 example above:
Rev 5 Reprogrammed

This entry was posted in One Synthesizer Sound Every Day and tagged , by John CS Keston. Bookmark the permalink.

About John CS Keston

John CS Keston is an award winning transdisciplinary artist reimagining how music, video art, and computer science intersect. His work both questions and embraces his backgrounds in music technology, software development, and improvisation leading him toward unconventional compositions that convey a spirit of discovery and exploration through the use of graphic scores, chance and generative techniques, analog and digital synthesis, experimental sound design, signal processing, and acoustic piano. Performers are empowered to use their phonomnesis, or sonic imaginations, while contributing to his collaborative work. Originally from the United Kingdom, John currently resides in Minneapolis, Minnesota where he is a professor of Digital Media Arts at the University of St Thomas. He founded the sound design resource, AudioCookbook.org, where you will find articles and documentation about his projects and research. John has spoken, performed, or exhibited original work at New Interfaces for Musical Expression (NIME 2022), the International Computer Music Conference (ICMC 2022), the International Digital Media Arts Conference (iDMAa 2022), International Sound in Science Technology and the Arts (ISSTA 2017-2019), Northern Spark (2011-2017), the Weisman Art Museum, the Montreal Jazz Festival, the Walker Art Center, the Minnesota Institute of Art, the Eyeo Festival, INST-INT, Echofluxx (Prague), and Moogfest. He produced and performed in the piece Instant Cinema: Teleportation Platform X, a featured project at Northern Spark 2013. He composed and performed the music for In Habit: Life in Patterns (2012) and Words to Dead Lips (2011) in collaboration with the dance company Aniccha Arts. In 2017 he was commissioned by the Walker Art Center to compose music for former Merce Cunningham dancers during the Common Time performance series. His music appears in The Jeffrey Dahmer Files (2012) and he composed the music for the short Familiar Pavement (2015). He has appeared on more than a dozen albums including two solo albums on UnearthedMusic.com.

6 thoughts on “Roland Super Jupiter MKS-80 Rev 4 Versus Rev 5”

  1. Hi,

    I owned both Rev4 and Rev5 during a period of time, and decided to record the same patch with each of them. I could do this because they were programmed through the same MPG80 programmer.

    PLease find here my two files. You can setup those files in 2 tracks of your sequencer, in order to mute one or the other and make the Rev4/Rev5 comparaison easier.

    Regards,

    http://9giga.sfr.fr/n/50-17/share/LNK36004ad38a04170b6/

  3. Hello there… On the second set of audio files you have not said which is the rev. 4 and which is rev. 5. I assume the top file is the 4 and bottom is the 5 but I’d rather not assume.

  4. LOL…. Nevermind. When downloading the files, they say which is which! Still a rough comparison. Upon listening to both, I can’t really be certain which one I like better as the differences are very minimal… almost un-noticeable.

  5. Personally, I think the rev 4 sounds fuller and seems to have a nicer bottom than the rev 5. IMHO.

  6. I think it’s a matter of how the patches are programmed. However, from all the examples I’ve heard it does seem like the filter on the Rev 5 is a little bit more tame than it is on the Rev 4.

Leave a Reply