Nord C1 vs Hammond.....best comparison video on youtube?

[jfhyde]

I think he said the slow-down & speed-up rates are tweakable, so you could probably make the bottom rotor slow down slower.

 

The C1 is not very tweakable, you get fast, normal, and slow. I think in the video, the demonstrator said he had all the settings on slow. So thats as slow as it'll go.....

 

John

[Floyd Tatum]

The C1 is not very tweakable, you get fast, normal, and slow. I think in the video, the demonstrator said he had all the settings on slow. So thats as slow as it'll go.....

 

John

 

Ok, I watched it again, and I see (hear) what you mean.

 

It still sounds pretty good to me, though!

 

[HammondDave]

They all sound good. I have played them all, and have three real B3's in my house. The clonewheel segment of the insdustry has reached a point where you cannot tell them apart from the real thing. Jim is right, you need to tweak the XK3C to get the sound that you want, but at least you can tweak it. I have tweaked my XK3C to sound like all three of my B3's (and they all sound quite different due to their vibrato scanners, capacitors, Leslies, etc). Like the video above, they are indistinguishable from the originals (when played through the same Leslies). Plus unlike the "perfect" clone demo mentioned above, you can assign the click parameter to one of the MIDI dials and adjust it during a performance. I do that all the time and am happy to have that option. You can also adjust the Leslie to slow down and ramp up aith authentic speed... not the ultra fast braking on the Nord (you can see in his eyes that he heard it, but for some reason he does not mention it)...

 

What this guy does not understand is that there is much more to playing a Hammond than recreating the "sound". Although he mentions the authentic "feel" of the keyboard, he does not mention the strange user interface of the C1. Look closely at the video, when he pulls the drawbars out on his Hammond it is effortless. When he tries to do the same on the Nord he hisitates, looks, and then plays with those stupid buttons. The same when he changes leslie speeds and chorus... He squints his eyes to find the right button (hidden somehwere in that mess of dials) and presses it carefully.

 

Kudos to Diversi, Roland, Hammond, and Korg for producting clones with real drawbars and control layouts that are similar to the original. Why Nord did not do this is beyond me...

 

 

[Phil Aiken]

Anyone have a link to directions for cloning a tonewheel set on an XK-3?

Did a search that turned up nothing.

I have an M-3 whose darkish sound I really like for some stuff - would love to clone it.

 

I'd also like to publicly thank Jim for sending me his tonewheel set some time ago. It is what I currently use, after personalizing it a bit.

 

[WWW]

...unlike the "perfect" clone demo mentioned above, you can assign the click parameter to one of the MIDI dials and adjust it during a performance. I do that all the time and am happy to have that option. .....

 

 

Wow... I never saw Jimmy Smith doing a MIDI assignment to change the key click live. I guess that's why his performances suck so badly!

 

Also, thanks for the insight on the C1 control panel! I must not have noticed that there weren't any drawbars!

[Floyd Tatum]

They all sound good.

 

I cannot agree. Especially when it comes to Leslie sim. Most of them are weak in that dept.

 

The nord rotor slow-down might not be quite as slow as the real Leslie, but overall, the sound of the nord leslie sim is pretty convincing, to me. Not true for many (most) of the other leslie sims out there. Other than the Nord, I liked the Korg leslie sim.

 

And it's no secret that the nord's don't have drawbars...

 

But I have to agree with you about the drawbars and layout. If Nord had drawbars, and a layout closer to the b3, they'd probably sell more of them.

 

I suggested this once before, but I think Nord should market a little add-on removable drawbar device which fits snugly over the LED-bars.

[zahush76]

That's the problem with most of these things is that people are automatically swayed because they just laid down a couple thousand dollars for their clonewheel.

 

 

So... you yourself probably got your XK3 for free, thus making your opinion about it as objective as possible?

 

If you're claiming that someone that spent lots of money on a keyboard - will praise it even if it's not that good just because he paid a lot for it - how can we be sure you're not praising your XK3 just because you paid lots of money for it?

 

[HammondDave]

I was not referring to the leslie sims when I stated that they all sounded good. You are right, no clonewheel has been able to faithfully recreate the Leslie sound. It is just a matter of physics when you have sound waves bouncing off walls from a spinning horn. There is also a definite coloring of the sound when the Leslie sim is engaged.

 

You will notice that in the second video the organs do not sound identical anymore. That is because the real Hammond is going through a real Leslie and the Nord is going through the sim. A real Leslie makes a world of difference in the sound of a clone. I perform with a Leslie 2101 and a Speakeasy AMA just to get the Leslie tube sound.

 

And finally, I am not claiming that someone who has paid a lot of money for a clone will subjectively praise it. All these comments are just personal opinions. The only thing that bothers me is that this "objective" reviewer is not mentioning all the facts (positive and negative). This has all been debated on the clonewheel list. For some players the lack of real drawbars and preset keys do not make a difference to them. For others (like myself), they are critical to our style of playing. No, Jimmy Smith did not have a MIDI control for key click, but for me its certainly nice to have that option (along with tweakable tonewheels, vibrato, etc).

 

 

[JMcS]

Anyone have a link to directions for cloning a tonewheel set on an XK-3?

Did a search that turned up nothing.

I have an M-3 whose darkish sound I really like for some stuff - would love to clone it.

 

I'd also like to publicly thank Jim for sending me his tonewheel set some time ago. It is what I currently use, after personalizing it a bit.

 

With the XK-3 and '3c you can tweak each "Tonewheel". You listen to each tonewheel on your M3 and tweak the corresponding tonewheel on the XK-3/c until they sound alike.

[Jim Alfredson]

That's the problem with most of these things is that people are automatically swayed because they just laid down a couple thousand dollars for their clonewheel.

 

 

So... you yourself probably got your XK3 for free, thus making your opinion about it as objective as possible?

 

No, I am a Hammond endorsed artist, but I do not get their products for free. I sought an endorsement deal after I played the XK3, which I hated at first. I played it for a good half hour (with the full XK System) and I really wanted to like it, but it just sounded bad.

 

The next day I came back to the music store and had the salesperson plug the XK into a tube Leslie (122xb). That's when I decided I needed one. After seeing the price, I thought I might try to get an endorsement deal, which I did and which saved me a lot of money.

 

I played the XK System for about a year and started to get tired of it; the sound was close, but it was bugging me. Something wasn't right. That's when I decided to program my own tonewheel set, which basically turned the XK3 into a brand new instrument. For one thing, Hammond-Suzuki has the upper foldback set to high, so if you use a lot of upper drawbars, it doesn't sound right. That's just one example. I tweaked a lot of things and I still tweak things depending on what Leslie I'm running through.

 

If you're claiming that someone that spent lots of money on a keyboard - will praise it even if it's not that good just because he paid a lot for it - how can we be sure you're not praising your XK3 just because you paid lots of money for it?

 

 

You can't be sure. Just like you can't be sure the guy in that Nord video is being objective. Which is why you need to use your own ears and make up your own mind. Each clone has its strengths and weaknessess. Each has subtle differences in sound. It's up to you to decide which clone fits your needs and expectations the best

 

It's human nature to justify something based on price. We all do it; I am no exception.

 

My beef with the two videos is that they are not very helpful in making up one's own mind because of the crummy audio of the clips. I guarantee if he had used better mics, properly setup, it would give you a much better reference point with which to make your decision.

 

Unless your mind is already made up!

[Jim Alfredson]

Anyone have a link to directions for cloning a tonewheel set on an XK-3?

Did a search that turned up nothing.

I have an M-3 whose darkish sound I really like for some stuff - would love to clone it.

 

I'd also like to publicly thank Jim for sending me his tonewheel set some time ago. It is what I currently use, after personalizing it a bit.

 

With the XK-3 and '3c you can tweak each "Tonewheel". You listen to each tonewheel on your M3 and tweak the corresponding tonewheel on the XK-3/c until they sound alike.

 

The best way is to put both the XK3 and the M3 through a mixer and listen under headphones. Pull out one drawbar on each (the same drawbar, obviously) and find the corresponding digital tonewheel in the XK3 and start tweaking. Repeat until you've gotten all the digital tonewheels tweaked.

[kanker.]

That's the problem with most of these things is that people are automatically swayed because they just laid down a couple thousand dollars for their clonewheel.

 

 

So... you yourself probably got your XK3 for free, thus making your opinion about it as objective as possible?

 

If you're claiming that someone that spent lots of money on a keyboard - will praise it even if it's not that good just because he paid a lot for it - how can we be sure you're not praising your XK3 just because you paid lots of money for it?

 

Huh? He must have gotten it for free, but he paid lots of money for it? OK... zahush76, I wouldn't really bother questioning B3-er's intentions. This is a guy who was happy hauling a B3 around for years. If his XK-3 crapped out on him, he'd be happy hauling a B3 again. The XK-3 just happens make moving a B3 unnecessary for him.

 

 

Anyway, I can tell you why I passed on the C1 and went with the XK-3c. After all these years, I'm starting to tire of the Nord organ sound. Is it good, heck yeah, very impressive, even in the (relatively) ancient Electro, but Nord definitely has a "sound" to all their clones that's starting to wear on me. Add to that the very synthetic sound of their percussion in the C1 (which is still a huge improvement over the Electro's perc), and the VASTLY improved Leslie sim in the XK-3c and it was a fairly easy decision. Still, if the XK-3c were not around, I would have gone with the C1. As it is, I was happy to spend more for the XK-3c's more impressive sound and feature set.

 

The XK-3 quite frankly sounds like pure crap without a Leslie. I did a week of gigs in Colorado with an XK-3 and halfway through the first gig, I ended up just using it as a controller for my Electro rack. I went the rest of the week using nothing but the sounds from my Electro, including organ. Had it been an XK-3c, I would have used the organs from the Hammond without hesitation.

[Jim Alfredson]

Yep, the Leslie sim in the XK3 is worthless. But thankfully I don't rely on the internal sim.

 

As I said, all the clones have their pros and cons. Making a choice is a personal one and no one is right or wrong for which one they choose. It's up to your needs, your budget, and how much weight you want to carry!

 

I chose the XK System because I didn't want to make any sacrifices to move from a B3. Kevin is spot on: I hauled a real B3 around for almost 10 years because there was nothing that was satisfying to me until the XK System came along. The XK3 was the closest solution, with real drawbars, the controls in the right spots, the preset keys, the look, the pedals, and the sound. The XK3c is better because of the split chorus/vibrato.

 

For someone who doesn't need all that and just wants a two manual organ, the C1 is a no-brainer. But if the XK system didn't exist and there was only the C1, I would still be hauling a B3 because of my personal needs. That's just me.

[DaveMcM]

Wow... I never saw Jimmy Smith doing a MIDI assignment to change the key click live. I guess that's why his performances suck so badly!

 

Good point. On the other hand, what about the player who is covering various genres of music. Some styles of music may require dirtier contacts than others, brighter or mellower, more bleedthrough or less, etc. Each tonewheel Hammond has a specific character and when playing a tune recorded with a given organ it is sure nice to be able to duplicate the character of that particular instrument.

 

I'll bet there were times when Jimmy Smith wished for a different organ than the one rented for a gig.

[Jim Alfredson]

Since YouTube won't let you upload videos longer than 10 minutes anymore (I don't know when they changed that, but it stinks), I just uploaded it to my site for the time being. I'll eventually put it on YouTube in two parts.

 

This is a 100mb high-quality mpeg4 file. You'll need something like Quicktime to play it.

 

Comparison of a 1958 B3 and a Hammond Suzuki XK3:

http://www.organissimo.org/media/video/hammond2.mp4

[bhodaway10]

B3-er - Awesome!

 

I can't watch this at work but will do when I go home. I think we need a new topic or a rename of this post : Comparison of a 1958 B3 and a Hammond Suzuki XK3 or Comparison of a 1958 B3 and a Hammond Suzuki XK3 vs. Nord C1 vs Hammond.

[HammondDave]

Bravo, Jim! Great video, and great playing...

[DaveMcM]

Don't get me wrong, I am happy with my XK System, but when I watch and listen to comparison videos like these it all seems to come down to basically one thing; old tonewheel Hammond's have guts (balls) and the digital clonewheels don't. That underlying ever present grumble from the old electronics. But I am still much happier carrying around the XK system rather than my B3.

[mate stubb]

Heh.

 

Hammonds rule.

 

70 years after the creation of the most magnificent electric instrument ever created, here we are passionately arguing our preferences over the best imitation, whilst our shiny synthesizers lay in the corner neglected.

 

May it ever be so!

[Gary75]

I can't be bothered to tweak things anymore, I want one good organ sound, and not infinite edit screens. I can't choose which tonewheel organ I can use for a rock or jazz gig. Nobody can unless they collect them, so I'm not big on the whole let's imitate one with dirty contacts, one with a poorly calibrated preamp, like I say, one good organ sound and an 11pin out will do me.

 

[retrokeys]

I think mate stubb has it right. We are essentially arguing over taste here. Face it. No two Hammonds sound exactly alike. They didn't when they were new and they sure don't now that they have aged and been tweaked a bit. No two leslies sound the same either. Arguing over the "perfection" of how fast the lower rotor slows down is pretty arcane (but fun) when one considers what stiff bearings, old grommets and tight or loose belts can do to rotor speed. I absolutely agree with B3-er when he says that nothing substitutes for moving air. Having heard our man bhodaway10 with his C1 I think it unanimous that he needs and "deserves" a real leslie be it flatpack or 3300 or whatever. Even there, we can't agree on the specifics. Playability is a more serious issue. I sold a perfectly good VK7 and bought an XK3 because I couldn't get used to the placement of controls and thought that the vibrato/chorus access was ridiculous on the Roland. I own an electro 61 but use it primarily for EP and clavs on the gig. I only use the organ voice at practice when I don't want to set up the whole rig. I'm intrigued with the Hammichord only because it has four sets of drawbars and I have always liked having a "go to" set I could get with a key click. I know the XK and even the electro have the preset toggle function but I like to see where I am going. Again, no argument for taste. I dearly love my 1959 C3 and I actually like the fact that the XK3 sounds brighter. If they were identical suppose I'd have to think about giving one up and that goes against everything I hold sacred. The next version will always be the best. At least for a while. : )

[HammondDave]

I understand what you are saying... But it is true that every Hammod has its own little quirks... couple that with the sonic differnces among different models of Leslies and the sound of the organ will become even more distinctive.

 

Just listen to the differences in the sounds of the organs played by: Jon Lord, Jimmy Smith, Booker T., Stevie Winwood, Keith Emerson, Mark Stein, Peter Robinson, and Hugh Banton. All played Hammond consoles and all their organs sound extremely different.

 

So that being said, when covering music it sure is nice to be able to change the dynamic sound quality of the organ from Keith Emerson to Jon Lord, to Jimmy Smith, etc. It is a pretty cool feature to have.

 

 

I only wish I could change my playing ability that easy...

[Doc Tonewheel]

Heh.

 

Hammonds rule.

 

70 years after the creation of the most magnificent electric instrument ever created, here we are passionately arguing our preferences over the best imitation, whilst our shiny synthesizers lay in the corner neglected.

 

May it ever be so!

 

I agree! It's nice to see a bunch of men speaking so passionately and with such love about their organs in that manly, "Fight Club" sorta way. As Dave said, Hammonds F'ing Rule!!!!

 

Disclaimer: The previous is the sole opinion of the poster who is in no way related to or holds any interest in the Hammond-Suzuki or Clavia-Nord companies.

[Jim Alfredson]

Don't get me wrong, I am happy with my XK System, but when I watch and listen to comparison videos like these it all seems to come down to basically one thing; old tonewheel Hammond's have guts (balls) and the digital clonewheels don't.

 

Yep. And while I did my best to match the B3 as closely as possible with the XK3 and my custom tonewheel set, there are some things that cannot be matched... yet. Like the fact that some notes / drawbar combinations produce wildly different crosstalk than others.

 

Interestingly enough, when we recorded the new organissimo CD, I had planned on using the XK3 / XK System on some tunes and the 1958 B3 on others. But when I played a few tunes on the B3 and heard the playback, I thought the XK3 sounded better. It was more defined in the mix, especially the low end. That's one of the things I love about it; it has a tight booty! I decided to just stick with the XK3 for the recording.

 

But I will never give up my '58 B3. She's my girl!

[Chris Link]

Curious, is the C1 small enough to work has a second tier board?

He was playing on top of a B3, so I'm thinking maybe it would go flat on the CP300?

 

I didn't like having the C1 on a second tier on top of the S90 (on a Monolith stand). Either the S90 was too low or the C1 too high. When I've taken it out, I've had to set up in an "L" and when I left the Electro at home, I missed the EPs (especially the Wurli) compared to the S90.

 

And this from one who was trying out the Nord Stage last summer to see if I could get by with a single board.

[kanker.]

But I will never give up my '58 B3. She's my girl!

In spite of her loose booty?

[Jim Alfredson]

But I will never give up my '58 B3. She's my girl!

In spite of her loose booty?

 

 

Haha, yeah. That and the fact that she has "balls".

[kanker.]

But I will never give up my '58 B3. She's my girl!

In spite of her loose booty?

 

 

Haha, yeah. That and the fact that she has "balls".

I think it's ok if your organ has balls

[Jim Alfredson]

Even if it's a she?

[kanker.]

Even if it's a she?

Well, anything's possible