Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Springsteen Keyboard Rig Upgrade


JohnH

Recommended Posts

I see David Rosenthal has also helped Roy and Charlie with new rigs. Toto has done similar things lately with Mainstage being run off Motif XF controllers. Very interesting. This is from 2012, sorry if this repeats, I've searched twice to find if this was posted before.

 

http://www.keyboardmag.com/artists/1236/tech-of-the-bruce-springsteen-tour-2012/28765

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

cool video series. Interestingly, they have a Behringer line mixer in the racks.

Live: Korg Kronos 2 88, Nord Electro 5d Nord Lead A1

Toys: Roland FA08, Novation Ultranova, Moog LP, Roland SP-404SX, Roland JX10,Emu MK6

www.bksband.com

www.echoesrocks.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cool video series. Interestingly, they have a Behringer line mixer in the racks.
There's no reason to feel lonely, Dan! I hear everyone is using Behringer line mixers now. :wave:

 

I used that same Behringer line mixer in my rig for years. It was quiet (introduced no noise) and worked perfectly. The only reason I don't use it now is because of my current setup where i don't run into a mixer before going to FOH.

David

Gig Rig:Casio Privia PX-5S | Yamaha MODX+ 6 | MacBook Pro 14" M1| Mainstage

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that they are still using Yamaha P50m Modules but only as backups for Roy's midi'ed C3 Grand. I only gigged with it a few times(sounded good through the band) but think I'm going to be trying mine out for band practice.

Hammonds:1959 M3,1961 A-101,Vent, 2 Leslies,VB3/Axiom,

Casio WK-7500,Yamaha P50m Module/DGX-300

Gig rig:Casio PX-5S/Roland VR-09/Spacestation V3

http://www.petty-larceny-band.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that they are still using Yamaha P50m Modules but only as backups for Roy's midi'ed C3 Grand.

 

Right. Should both Muse Receptors fail, there would still be something available short of actually micing up the piano. This way the piano being in tune or not is never an issue.

:nopity:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used the P50 piano for a number of years, it did have a nice sound for back in the day.

 

My Behringer line mixer has been rock solid for me. It is in my rack and is gigged regularly, getting banged around during load ins/outs.

Live: Korg Kronos 2 88, Nord Electro 5d Nord Lead A1

Toys: Roland FA08, Novation Ultranova, Moog LP, Roland SP-404SX, Roland JX10,Emu MK6

www.bksband.com

www.echoesrocks.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After watching these vids I wonder who had the idea building double "21-century" rigs to have one as a backup and use the old rig as a backup too.

In no way that shrinks the rig but makes it much larger.

Even a duplication of the old rig would be smaller.

 

All the old gear below the stage is in working condition, powered up and runs in parallel to the 2 Mainstage/Receptor rigs of the 2 keyboardplayers.

 

I think the band always sounded good and had success in largest halls and stadiums all over the world and that hi-tech stuff doesn´t make anything better for the audience and for the musicians.

It´s insanely complex because they now have to trigger 3 rigs for each keyboardplayer MIDI wise, pay attention on what fails and what not, muting/unmuting mixer channels then and it needs techs operating the gear while the musicians play only.

 

When I did concert touring it was me deciding which gear I use and it was also me programming all the patches incl. splits, layers and related MIDI commands.

My roadie set up the gear but that was it.

 

Now, the "transition is seamless" and the musicians don´t know what is sounding when they play ...

Why ?

Because the "21-century" rig sounds exactly as old as the old rig itself, or what ?

 

The musician is totally addicted to the tech´s work.

I have the impression this exactly is the intention.

 

Is that really necessary or is it because someone had seen others use Mainstage and Macbooks and software ROMplers and synths ?

 

Hard to come by replacement parts for older hardware is a fairytale because especially a production like Springsteen´s gets everything from manufacturers and service departments all over the globe and I don´t see extremely rare vintage gear in that rig.

When I was touring frequently, the tech managers had filofaxes thick like telephone books, just only contacts of service departments, manufacturers, technicians of all kind and worldwide.

I don´t think that changed except there´s now a laptop replacing the filofax.

You can buy M1 and such modules just around the corner for $200.- or less and I think it´s much harder to replace one of the JL Cooper Synapses than any hardware keyboard or module.

 

Anyway, for me it is insanely stupid and I´m absolutely not impressed. It´s just only overkill and show up.

When I want a new and modern rig,- I want one which works and doesn´t need a backup or two and I don´t want to become the slave of my tech(s).

I didn´t need a backup for about 30 years of live gigging and touring even I operated 30HU racks full of gear controlled by 3 or 4 MIDI keyboards.

There was never a failure ruin a concert. Never.

I doubt that happens w/ any Macbook/Mainstage & Receptor single rig.

 

A.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the level of complexity is too high, and also that running two systems in tandem is a PITA. I always bring a backup to larger gigs for the simple reason that I've had my keys smashed by roadies more than once and because every single piece of gear I've ever owned has failed me one way or the other. But dual laptop rigs with receptors doesn't really appeal to me... I've done a fair share of laptop gigs, and they're prone to faliure, at least compared to a dedicated synth module.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After watching these vids I wonder who had the idea building double "21-century" rigs to have one as a backup and use the old rig as a backup too.

In no way that shrinks the rig but makes it much larger.

Even a duplication of the old rig would be smaller.

Reading between the lines of the diplomatic statements made by David Rosenthal and the keyboard techs, I had the impression that touring with the old rig running as a backup was a diktat laid down by the artists, or was deemed necessary as a provisional measure because of the last-minute nature of the upgrade project.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the level of complexity is too high, and also that running two systems in tandem is a PITA.

 

I understand, for each keyboardplayer it is the modern rig w/ an identical backup plus the old hardware based rig.

That´s 2 triple rigs to me.

 

I always bring a backup to larger gigs for the simple reason that I've had my keys smashed by roadies more than once and because every single piece of gear I've ever owned has failed me one way or the other.

 

Well, on only ONE tour I had the case the crew damaged my gear the way it became useless except one keyboard,- but that was a case for production and not mine,- and it needed only until the next gig to be fixed.

I´d never buy myself a double or triple rig just only to be safe.

When I come w/ a well maintained rig I can expect the tech crew doesn´t drink, smokes pot or is sniffing and takes care for it because it´s my rig which I rent to the production.

Otherwise I´d prefer not to bring anything at all and play what the production thinks is good for ´em and pays.

 

In case of Springsteen and other top acts, I think it works like that,- the production buys/rents the gear, hires and pays techs.

 

But dual laptop rigs with receptors doesn't really appeal to me... I've done a fair share of laptop gigs, and they're prone to faliure, at least compared to a dedicated synth module.

 

Exactly. But once such rigs are set up, the hired specialist-techs have work always to keep it running and get payed.

I´m pretty sure Springsteen´s managers have no clou about that technology and don´t know whether it´s essential or not and I also expect Springsteen himself hasn´t too.

Someone told ´em "others" use it and it´s absolutely necessary and then it created a budget.

To me, it´s all politics.

 

I understand and accept when you´re flying to gigs you need portable gear and when you play in small locations w/ small stages, you need small footprint gear and then you go w/ the risky software rig and 1 or 2 controllers and hope for it won´t fail.

 

But what I see there for the Springsteen production to me is pure tech hype and I absolutely cannot recognize where the musical advantage is.

 

A.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to know exactly what the driving force was behind this "update to the 21st century". Was it initiated by Springsteen himself, the keyboard players, the techs, the equipment manufacturers, some other person or entity?

 

Yes, that´s the most interesting question !

 

A.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That´s 2 triple rigs to me.

 

Yup, counting dupicates and backups. I've seen Springsteen a couple of times with different keyboard rigs (mostly Nords and Yamahas) and it always sounded great. I don't agree with their Leslie sound, though. That's the only place where I could feel there was room for improvement - in my taste. The last time I saw them Bittan was playing Ivory II on a Receptor, it sounded fantastic. In that particular case, the software route was the way to go.

 

Otherwise I´d prefer not to bring anything at all and play what the production thinks is good for ´em and pays.

 

Lol! I'd love to be able to do that... :)

 

I understand and accept when you´re flying to gigs you need portable gear and when you play in small locations w/ small stages, you need small footprint gear and then you go w/ the risky software rig and 1 or 2 controllers and hope for it won´t fail. But what I see there for the Springsteen production to me is pure tech hype and I absolutely cannot recognize where the musical advantage is.

 

Me neither. When I've done smaller gigs, I still prefer hardware modules. Unfortunately, that market isn't really alive and kicking.

 

The last time my synth was trashed, it happened pre-show and although damaged, it started, so I took a chance and played it. Halfway through the show, it died on me, but my backup keyboard was just beneath the stage and I was able to switch them without any major problems. I had all the programs synced. For me, it's also a great thing to have one setup at home or in my studio, and one stowed away with the production I'm doing. That way, I can easily work on stuff between gigs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a keyboard player, it's important to not lose focus of your main goal: you're part of a band, and your job is to cover sounds. That's what those keyboard players on stage are doing. Now, those tech-guys backstage - I have no idea how programming sounds [that they'll never play] is fun for them! Do I think that Springsteen's keyboard players would care either way? No. I'm puzzled by this whole thing, as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me it's a matter of scale & budget. I use a laptop rig with no backup, but if the budget allowed and I didn't have to deal with it, sure I'd ask for a backup rig! Why not? Springsteen can afford it, the tech guys set it up & move it. I'm sure the players themselves have none of their own time or money invested in these backup rigs. For us mere mortals the situation is different.

 

I don't know his tour specifics and haven't watched the videos, but I suspect that after a few incident-free tours with this setup, they could decide to ditch one of the backup rigs for each guy. Maybe they're playing it extra safe because it's new?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there anyone on the forum who can help explain these rigs from a point of necessity? For the nay-sayers, I can understand why the multiple redundant systems seem like 1950's nuclear strategic overkill. On the other hand, I can guess. Hmm...

 

The business manager looks at the old keyboard rigs and asks how old the gear is, if it's still being manufactured, and given the uncomfortable answer, says: 'What can we do to mitigate the technology risk'? This isn't like Bruce has a favorite '62 Strat. This is old DX-7s, K-2600s, and strange MIDI modules. They play nice, but the individual unit has no soul, little monetary value, can crap out anytime and can't be replaced with a new unit.

 

The answer itself (go digital) has risks too, so they double all the new digital stuff (cause it's relatively cheap to do so, and because everybody alive has had a computer hang up and worries about it). Then, to satisfy the most conservative minds, they keep the core of the old system, 'just in case'. In the end, the heart of the entire Bruce Springsteen keyboard rig is now 1s and 0s, can be replicated, stored, backed-up, and re-instantiated on a new rig quickly.

 

Seems like a straightforward business team decision when you have a billion dollar juggernaut to maintain. Given the session was in 2012 it would be interesting to find out their on-the-road experience with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me it's a matter of scale & budget... For us mere mortals the situation is different.

 

I suspect that after a few incident-free tours with this setup, they could decide to ditch one of the backup rigs for each guy. Maybe they're playing it extra safe because it's new?

Yup. The virtues of simplicity and self-reliance do not apply to arena-scale touring production. It's a whole different animal.

 

If they are adhering to David Rosenthal's design philosophy, they'll be keeping redundant, identical backup rigs for each player. I bet they will have ditched the original hardware rigs by now, though.

 

I'd like to see Keyboard do an update to that piece. It was early days for that upgrade when they did the original story.

 

There were a few things in that story that made me shake my head, though. The idea of touring with a 620-lb keyboard controller, and fixing its strings twice a week when the thing isn't even mic'd as a backup--wow. I realize it's an artist comfort thing, or maybe a stage presentation thing, but still.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end, the heart of the entire Bruce Springsteen keyboard rig is now 1s and 0s, can be replicated, stored, backed-up, and re-instantiated on a new rig quickly...

 

Seems like a straightforward business team decision when you have a billion dollar juggernaut to maintain.

It's exactly that simple. The only squirrelly part is the extra expense and effort required to make sure the artists are comfortable with the look, sound, and feel onstage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to know exactly what the driving force was behind this "update to the 21st century".

well never know for sure, so let's just call it Bruce Springsteen Inc.

Mr. Springsteen has a net worth as large as Mick Jagger, in the US $300 million dollar range. The High Hopes Tour, which was less than 4 months long earlier this year, had box office sales of US $65 million dollars. If there were 2 more layers of redundancy behind what is already being discussed it wouldn't matter except it would be helping the economy. More gear being purchased and maybe more jobs being created, even if only temporary.

:nopity:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hardly post anymore and its been months but as someone that knows a little bit about the Springsteen camp I had to chime in. I can agree the tandem rigs are weird, especially as their rigs were basic. Years ago Dan was using a hot-rodded B-3, Leslie, Jenco Celeste, Accordion and an Occasional Wurlitzer or Farfisa. In this case having a backup Hammond B-3 is fine, nothing wrong with that as they are old technology and have problems. Other than that Dans rig was basic. Roy always played Yamaha until he picked up a CS-80 and that must have been 81 or so. In 1988 on the The Tnnel of Love tour they switched sides and were using different gear. In the 1990s Dan was using Alesis gear. I think some of it is that when Danny died somethings changed. Dan was a little bit of an engineer and was always trying to get a better sound out of his B-3. I am not sure how Charlie Giordano is versed with gear. I have problems with how he plays some of the parts musically but basically its the same rig Dan used but without that Nord shit. Roys piano sounds way to sterile now compared to how it did. There are tons of videos and boots to show the same song but sounding differently because of technology.

 

Bottom line is if you guys dont agree it doesnt matter because these guys have paid their dues. Playing on shitty make-shift stages made of lunch room tables at colleges, sleeping in a converted van to tour during Born To Run when everyone thought they were making a lot of cash, and just tons of touring over the years. His organization owed a shit load of money before the Born in the USA when they finally made it big in 1983-1986.

 

Also realize this rig is a little different now. This is a couple years old.

 

"Danny, ci manchi a tutti. La E-Street Band non e' la stessa senza di te. Riposa in pace, fratello"

 

 

noblevibes.com

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From an IT guy POV -- an IT guy that works in telecom and needs absolute reliability -- the rig as described in the videos makes perfect sense. Good redundancy, and a fail-safe to a tried-and-true system during a transitional period.

 

BTW, it's nice you're posting a bit more Outkaster. You always have lots to share. :)

 

My idea of "the sound" of rock keys has been very much influenced by the sound of the E. Street Band. Rock sax, too. I took up tenor saxophone a few years after Born In The USA because I wanted to sound like Clarence. Unfortunately, I never figured out how to get a seat in a rock band before I put the sax away permanently(?) 8 years later.

 

When did you think Roy's piano changed, BTW? You think Ivory is too sterile, or think only a real-deal piano cuts the mustard? I play almost exclusively DPs and I think they sound great, until I play a real piano. Then I feel very frustrated. Happens about once every five years. I console myself by telling myself that nobody can tell the difference in a band mix anyhow.

 

Wes

Hammond: L111, M100, M3, BC, CV, Franken CV, A100, D152, C3, B3

Leslie: 710, 760, 51C, 147, 145, 122, 22H, 31H

Yamaha: CP4, DGX-620, DX7II-FD-E!, PF85, DX9

Roland: VR-09, RD-800

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as we're talking about this stuff.... What exactly is going on with the keys between the chromatic run and the "one two three four!" on Born To Run? Sounds like he's got his whole arm down on one of the manuals? Maybe both of them?

 

And the percussion...a timpani roll and a snare buzz roll?

 

Man they have such a together sound, it's really hard to pick the elements out.

Hammond: L111, M100, M3, BC, CV, Franken CV, A100, D152, C3, B3

Leslie: 710, 760, 51C, 147, 145, 122, 22H, 31H

Yamaha: CP4, DGX-620, DX7II-FD-E!, PF85, DX9

Roland: VR-09, RD-800

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Outkaster,

What time period did Roy use the Yammy P50m on stage rather than a "real piano?" Is that the period you consider his piano "less sterile?" Yeah, Charlie does play a few things different than Danny did but he's no slouch. I love the way he did the organ smears on the intro to Land of Hope and Dreams on Wrecking Ball. [video:youtube]

Also Bruce's voice on Magic, particularly on Girls in Their Summer Clothes (love the song) sounded unusually smooth IMO. A little digital makeup applied here? [video:youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8PB1a1c9zA

Hammonds:1959 M3,1961 A-101,Vent, 2 Leslies,VB3/Axiom,

Casio WK-7500,Yamaha P50m Module/DGX-300

Gig rig:Casio PX-5S/Roland VR-09/Spacestation V3

http://www.petty-larceny-band.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well myself and one other contributor to this thread have been to a High Hopes concert this year. My take the sound in the arena setting I was in there was that there was too much wall and too little detail.

 

Roys piano sounded very digital in the mix. By comparison it was a relief to hear the B3 in the mix - it sounded organic :D and soothing. But given the AP I was hearing was 100% amped I don't think it would have made any difference if there had been a real acoustic grand on stage. Both keys were lucky to be heard at all over the four guitars.

A misguided plumber attempting to entertain | MainStage 3 | Axiom 61 2nd Gen | Pianoteq | B5 | XK3c | EV ZLX 12P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... was that there was too much wall and too little detail.

 

Roys piano sounded very digital in the mix. By comparison it was a relief to hear the B3 in the mix - it sounded organic :D and soothing.

... Both keys were lucky to be heard at all over the four guitars.

 

An the award possibly goes to their FOH guy(s) and not to the gear,- may it be the old or new.

 

A.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stopped posting as the place was becoming a cesspool a year ago. Certain people that should have been banned were posting and nothing was new, same old arguments.

 

Remember Dan was a prodigy accordion player so he used that influence to play a Hammond. He had to have a Hammond, when he did get a B-3 he went to town with it, applied certain tricks and really got into it. He struggled with drinking and before he died in April of 2008 he had started to get his life together and was recording some jazz CDs. A lot of things he did went unsaid, He and Roy established a sound that now one else did. He was also very instinctually gifted which Charlie is not, and Charlie has admitted he can get close to Dans sound but never really can get it? Anyway Roy is on the Born to Run track I dont think its Dan if I remember right as he was not around for those sessions. In fact it is Dave Sancious. IF you see the Born to Run documentary there is a part where they are going through old tracks and talk about that song.

 

I dont ever remember Roy using a Yamaha P50m. He uses Kurzweil gear plus what you saw in that documentary and one time used a Korg SG-1D also. He has always played acoustic piano but it came with a price. The story of this track is that in 1980 they left the road case in the cold truck and when the piano was tuned it went haywire but this is arguably one of the best live versions of this song:

 

[video:youtube]

 

Anyway his piano is a midid grand. A family outside of Philadelphia does the maintenance work on it as touring has created ten times the normal amount of wear of a piano thats in someones home. The Ivory he is running makes it sound so sterile. It was organic sounding before because it was just an acoustic grand. The problem was more serious because he brought horns in, Tom Morello on guitar, three singers and percussion. The front of house guys had problems with the piano mics getting other sounds bleeding in so they went to Ivory I guess.

 

Dave Sancious was only around a little while, first two albums and went to form the band Tone. One of my favorite songs is NYC Serenade. I did this the other day but rushed it as I had to get back to work, there are three or for things I want to change and is just the intro. I was doing this in a lounge in the building next door from where I work at the hospital. I am a Reggae guy first and foremost but I have been messing around with the E-Street stuff since HS:

 

[video:youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Whb8G3Zzsn8

 

 

 

"Danny, ci manchi a tutti. La E-Street Band non e' la stessa senza di te. Riposa in pace, fratello"

 

 

noblevibes.com

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That sounds great! Nice playing.

 

I remember reading a reference to the P50m in Keyboard mag, or in one of their videos a few years ago. Unfortunately, I can't track it down now, and Google only leads me to my own comments on this forum in 2012!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...