Crumar Mojo 61 Review - (LONG)

[mate stubb]

I just did the 1.21 update and it rocks. The clavinet is a real beast now, with the inharmonic overtones dialed back to a sweet spot. AP seems snappier too.

 

Thanks Guido!

[Joe Muscara]

I was curious as to what it would sound like before and after the 1.21 update, so I noodled around with the Clav before I did it. Afterwards, the Clav as well as other sounds seemed louder to me. Was that my imagination? I usually had volume at about one o'clock but found myself turning it down to 10 or 11 o'clock post-update.

 

(Overall though, I'm very happy with the 1.21 fixes! Grazie, Guido!)

[mate stubb]

Guido's latest vid demonstrates the clav really well, at 6:25. Now I need a NanoControl.

 

[video:youtube]

[ElmerJFudd]

Needing a nano control or similar is not the slickest thing in the industry. Similar to using a button to pitch bend. Is the Mojo61 an organ or a digital swiss-army-knife keyboard? If the AP and EPs are a feature and not just ancillary "just in case you need them" sounds then the hardware user interface could have benefited from a few more input devices - some more knobs, wheels, extra faders or drawbars, ribbon control, does it have a continuous control pedal input, wah pedal jack?.. whatever is necessary to use what the internal engines can do. It would also make it more useful as a controller if you place a desktop synth on top (or they could have activated the GVA-1) and for use with Mainstage/Cantabile, etc. Looking forward to revisions on this concept from Crumar/GSi. YMMV

 

[AnotherScott]

First of all, is the NanoKontrol actually connected directly to the Mojo? If so, that's very cool. I wasn't aware of any board other than Kronos where you could directly plug in a USB control surface.

 

the hardware user interface could have benefited from a few more input devices - some more knobs, wheels, extra faders or drawbars, ribbon control.. whatever is necessary to use what the internal engines can do.

It sounds like maybe you're almost talking about a DMC-122 with a Gemini module.

 

I see the Mojo as (as you put it), more of an organ than a digital swiss-army-knife keyboard. It's easy to fall into "feature creep" -- "If only it had a few other sounds I'd need to get me through a gig..." becomes "let's have whatever is necessary to take advantage of what you can do with those sounds." Which means higher price, generally more size/weight (esp. if you then want more than 61 keys), and often additional operational complexity. I think there are probably customers for both. There are some nice things about the NanoKontrol approach... only those who need it have to pay for it (and it's pretty cheap anyway)... and people who prefer the clear panel space for board stacking don't have to give that up.

 

 

[Delaware Dave]

I use my PC3 (w/ the Gemini) like he setup in the video. For the Clav I assigned the first 4 sliders for the filter switches and the next 2 sliders for the pickups and the 9th slider as the envelope filter. Other switches turn the wah controls on/off. I'm anxiously awaiting a Gemini release of the sustain, piano sample trim and the clav inharmonic reduction fix. Only thing else on my wish list are saxes (alto, tenor, bari and soprano).

[AnotherScott]

I use my PC3 (w/ the Gemini) like he setup in the video. For the Clav I assigned the first 4 sliders for the filter switches and the next 2 sliders for the pickups and the 9th slider as the envelope filter. Other switches turn the wah controls on/off.

Obviously you have the sliders set up to do certain things when running the Gemini clav, and other things at other times, which is easy to do on the PC3. Does anyone know, could something similar be done with the NanoKontrol/Mojo combo, where the NK's sliders/buttons would do certain things on clav sounds, but other things on other sounds? If so, could this be done by storing different recallable sets of CCs within the NK (i.e. does the NK have that capability)? Or by storing different sets of what CC does what on different sounds inside the Mojo (again, does the Mojo have that capability)? Or can either/neither approach work?

[mate stubb]

Yes, the Nano is plugged directly into Mojo 61 with just a USB cable.

 

I don't know if it can do different things to different instruments. I suspect to be safe, one would want the Nano to send different CCs for each instrument, which would mean the Nano would need to switch CC sets as you switch instruments. But if Mojo blocks CC response to an inactive instrument, it could work pretty easily.

 

Hope that makes sense.

[AnotherScott]

I don't know if it can do different things to different instruments. I suspect to be safe, one would want the Nano to send different CCs for each instrument, which would mean the Nano would need to switch CC sets as you switch instruments. But if Mojo blocks CC response to an inactive instrument, it could work pretty easily.

Considering that the NKs are pretty small and cheap, I guess another approach would be to connect multiple NKs (via a USB hub). Then you could have one dedicated to clav functions, and another dedicated to something else (say, lower manual drawbars?), and another if you wanted... It would be nice to have printable templates to match the NKs to the desired look and functionality, along the lines of what this guy did...

http://drumsoft.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/nanoKontrol2-panel-full.jpg

but a little more sedate ;-)

 

[Ashville.Guru]

... could this be done by storing different recallable sets of CCs within the NK (i.e. does the NK have that capability)?

Yes - at least in the older NK, where there were 4 scenes, and a scene button. You could have the same control mapped to a different CC for every scene.

 

However, Korg has removed the Scene button in the NK2, and I don't think there's an equivalent anymore.

 

You could process the NK2 through Lemur on a smartphone/tablet to recreate the 'scene' effect. Or ditch the NK altogether and use touch sliders.

 

- Guru

[AnotherScott]

... could this be done by storing different recallable sets of CCs within the NK (i.e. does the NK have that capability)?

Yes - at least in the older NK, where there were 4 scenes, and a scene button. You could have the same control mapped to a different CC for every scene.

 

However, Korg has removed the Scene button in the NK2, and I don't think there's an equivalent anymore.

Geez, and they went from 9 sliders to 8, making it that much less useful for organ. Is there anything that the 2 does *better* than the original or is it all a step backwards, perhaps just to lower its manufacturing cost?

[Ashville.Guru]

Is there anything that the 2 does *better* than the original or is it all a step backwards, perhaps just to lower its manufacturing cost?

There's some DAW-specific stuff which I wouldn't know much about. Adding markers to tracks, that sort of thing.

 

For live players, the one significant thing that comes to mind is that the LEDS light up in response to external MIDI. Which fixes an annoying bug in the original, really. Don't know if there's anything else that's useful.

 

- Guru

[AnotherScott]

Thanks, AG. I hadn't even thought about sending MIDI *in* to the NK.

 

Back to the topic of clav sounds... One of my favorite unexpected surprises on the Nord E5D is the low release point on the clav sounds, it really increases the "snappiness." Does the Mojo do that? (I don't know off-hand if that was something new to the the Electro 5, or whether other Electro/Stage models have done that.)

[ElmerJFudd]

First of all, is the NanoKontrol actually connected directly to the Mojo? If so, that's very cool. I wasn't aware of any board other than Kronos where you could directly plug in a USB control surface.

 

the hardware user interface could have benefited from a few more input devices - some more knobs, wheels, extra faders or drawbars, ribbon control.. whatever is necessary to use what the internal engines can do.

It sounds like maybe you're almost talking about a DMC-122 with a Gemini module.

 

I see the Mojo as (as you put it), more of an organ than a digital swiss-army-knife keyboard. It's easy to fall into "feature creep" -- "If only it had a few other sounds I'd need to get me through a gig..." becomes "let's have whatever is necessary to take advantage of what you can do with those sounds." Which means higher price, generally more size/weight (esp. if you then want more than 61 keys), and often additional operational complexity. I think there are probably customers for both. There are some nice things about the NanoKontrol approach... only those who need it have to pay for it (and it's pretty cheap anyway)... and people who prefer the clear panel space for board stacking don't have to give that up.

 

 

I don't know, Scott. It's ok for Crumar to get some feedback other than how perfect if is in every way. If the piano patch needs the samples trimmed up on the left or the velocity behavior improved, they need to hear that. Same for users wanting the Clav in tune, or what have you. It's also ok to say the Leslie sim isn't as good as a Vent - or it's as good, or better (lol, we've heard it all). It's also valuable for Crumar to hear why users pass on it. Maybe it doesn't need feature creep... maybe if it has a great Clav sound & a great wah effect - then it could have used a pedal jack, or at least a wheel. Something. YMMV, no worries.

[AnotherScott]

I don't know, Scott. It's ok for Crumar to get some feedback other than how perfect if is in every way. If the piano patch needs the samples trimmed up on the left or the velocity behavior improved, they need to hear that. Same for users wanting the Clav in tune, or what have you. It's also ok to say the Leslie sim isn't as good as a Vent - or it's as good, or better (lol, we've heard it all). It's also valuable for Crumar to hear why users pass on it. Maybe it doesn't need feature creep... maybe if it has a great Clav sound & a great wah effect - then it could have used a pedal jack, or at least a wheel. Something. YMMV, no worries.

Sure, no issues with a wish list. But the other things you mentioned were all software, I think this is the first post about hardware. Which is fine too, but of course, is not "user upgradable," and also increases the manufacturing cost of the board. Depending on how little or how much you want to add, maybe it makes more sense for there to be different models (i.e. one more organ-focussed, one more multi-function). But my other point there was, they already make the DMC/Gemini combo which is another way to go if someone wants those things. As for the great wah effect, I guess you could go old school and do what people did on real clavs... but a wah pedal on it!

[ElmerJFudd]

you could go old school and do what people did on real clavs... but a wah pedal on it!

 

Fair but defeats the purpose of including the wah in software. And every piece of kit you need to pickup for what the firmware may already support adds to the cost of the thing as well. Not that an EV5 should be included, but give it a port, or a wheel... something. But ok, it's just an organ... or is it? Apparently it's more. And if it checks of the right boxes for some, great.

 

[mate stubb]

Elmer, the wah is controllable from the pedal jack when you are in clav mode.

[ElmerJFudd]

Thanks, Mate. Sheesh. It would be ridonculous otherwise. Is this jack continuous, momentary, on/off?

[wd8dky]

Continuous. My FV500L works perfectly.

[ElmerJFudd]

Continuous. My FV500L works perfectly.

 

Cool, how else is it currently implemented?

Other patches using it? Assignable? Could it be set to any CC#? (if they updated the sample set with some synth patches)

Is it local only, or can it send to MIDI out? Like if you velcro'd a Dave Smith desktop synth to it.

 

Does the firmware support sending a program change?

[mate stubb]

There is a Swell pedal input (continuous) input, a sustain input (momentary switch) and a speed input (dual or halfmoon) input. It may be switchable from momentary to latched, but I don't remember.

[Jazz+]

I love the Mojo just the way she is. I don't want any wheels, strings, brass or extra hardware, I am not even asking for a split function.

 

I remember that my Kurzweil PC 2X had in adjustable velocity scale and an adjustable velocity level in software for its piano. Since the Mojo has a piano and a Rhodes maybe it would be a good thing to add velocity scale and velocity level controls into the next software editor update. Then users could fine-tune it for their touch? Wouldn't that be a good thing,? My Casio PX 360 simply offers Normal, Light, and Heavy touch settings, which is helpful. But a medium heavy and medium light in adittion would be better.

[AnotherScott]

I love the Mojo just the way she is. I don't want any wheels, strings, brass or extra hardware

Yeah, that's kind of what I was thinking when I said I could envision the possibility of two different models, rather than adding hardware bells to the one... some people are still going to want the ergonomic/operational/aesthetic simplicity because really what they want is an organ, not a do-it-all board. Software changes--or even some new auxiliary sounds--are invisible if you don't care about them, but hardware changes always change the experience.

[ElmerJFudd]

I see on the Crumar Facebook feed they are contemplating a drawbar box to place on top of the Mojo61 to control the lower manual. I wonder if it would take the USB or MIDI in port? Would the Ocean Beach DB-1 work? I'm thinking yes, since the Gemini card takes CC's for drawbars.

[AnotherScott]

I see on the Crumar Facebook feed they are contemplating a drawbar box to place on top of the Mojo61 to control the lower manual. I wonder if it would take the USB or MIDI in port?

I seem to remember seeing that it was USB.

 

Would the Ocean Beach DB-1 work? I'm thinking yes, since the Gemini card takes CC's for drawbars.

Yeah, I would expect i to work.

[Delaware Dave]

A Voce Midi drawbar unit would work (or a Voce V5/V5+). I use that to control the Gemini module. The Midi drawbar has a main/aux switch. Main controls cc 12-20 (upper drawbars on Gemini); aux controls cc 21-29 (lower drawbars on Gemini).

[Kurt W]

Would the Ocean Beach DB-1 work? I'm thinking yes, since the Gemini card takes CC's for drawbars.

Yes it works. I use the DB-1 to control the lower manual drawbars on the Mojo 61. The DB-1 also have a programmable pushbutton which I use to turn on/off the lower manual V/C. The DB-1 really is a swiss knife, it also handles Kronos sysex drawbars.

[ElmerJFudd]

Typically how do you guys attach the extra drawbars? Voce, DB-1. I would imagine the matching Mojo version may dream up something Mojo61 specific. Otherwise Velcro?

[Jazz+]

I don't want more baggage (extra drawbars). Personally, I am very satisfied with the portable Mojo 61's organ Split Mode and single set of drawbars. I does everything I want. I don't need a lower manual.

 

I would like some additional wireless Editor capabilities added for Piano Velocity Level and Piano Velocity Scale. The Piano was added so recently, that I think we can expect such a future update to its wireless editor. Currently there are no editing capabilities assigned to the piano.

The Piano is evolving and getting better and better, it has the sound I like for live performance: clarity. The 1.5 ms clip was a great idea. Go Crumar!

[Kurt W]

Typically how do you guys attach the extra drawbars? Voce, DB-1. I would imagine the matching Mojo version may dream up something Mojo61 specific. Otherwise Velcro?

Two-tier setup with Mojo 61 on top of Kawai MP11 or Yamaha S90es. Plenty of space on the left panel side of both. Secure it with a piece of a StageWorks mat. Nice to have the lower manual drawbars close to the stage piano.