Clonewheel shootout, VSTs and hardware

[vanderSchoot]

Wow,.... that"s why i hardly take the outcome of such tests as some sort of buyer"s guide, althaugh i greatly appreciate all the efforts.

Thanks a lot !!

 

I hade a Nord stage 2 and electro 3 and the original Joey deFrancisco Numa.

The Numa sounded great, way more open and a 3d spatial fast leslie effect that did it"s magic in a real room instead of stereo imaging on a recording.

However the Numa"s overdrive was exceptionally bad.... it thought it really sucked.

Then i went to the HX3 + ventilator/real leslie and it was superb in every aspect for live usage with an arsenal of sounds and styles required.

 

And now i use B5 V2.02 (headphones only) and it"s the best i have heard yet from a fundamental tone perspective.

Downloaded IK, but not my cup of tea....

 

Wow i had to post this because i could hardly believe my own ears and other member"s comments about the respective recordings in this topic.

I cannot even trust myself nowadays.....

 

 

[BluesKeys]

My2c I found then all a bit lacking in one form or another.

1. Multimedia B3 X

2. VB3

3. Nord I still feel these are a little thin but the rotary on slow had a nice effect

4. Numa I liked because of the growl wasn't over processed, but that could be it's limit that you found

all there rest I lump together

[Delaware Dave]

If doesnt sound like you optimized the PC4 at all. I can assure you that my PC3's organ/leslie sounds 100% better than the PC4. And the overdrive you applied to the PC4 is way over the top. I' m not saying that the PC4 would win over fans if optimized but when optimized it sounds way better than that. Why didn't you add that much o/d to the Numa? On quick gigs i sometimes use the PC3's organ/leslie. I can assure you that if it sounded like the representation you have there would be no way I'd use it. Other than polyphony adjustments that Kurz made the PC3 and PC4 are about the same from a KB3 perspective.

Quick adjustments I would make would be to reduce the C/V to C1 (chorus is horrible and cant be user adjusted), reduce the slow rotor throb, slow down the fast horn, significantly reduce the overdrive, center pan both double leslie's.

 

Again, the effort to put this together had to have been substantial and that is much appreciated.

[AnotherScott]

If doesnt sound like you optimized the PC4 at all.

Correct. I spent very little effort optimizing *any* of them. For the Kurz, as I mentioned, I picked what I thought was one of the better sounding presets (PictureOfNectar), took off the reverb, pulled out all the drawbars, pushed up the mode wheel a bunch (OD), and that's probably it.

 

can assure you that my PC3's organ/leslie sounds 100% better than the PC4. And the overdrive you applied to the PC4 is way over the top....Why didn't you add that much o/d to the Numa?

As I mentioned, I pushed each unit's OD as far as I thought I could before it stopped sounding better and started sounding worse... which is admittedly subjective, and is therefore one of the inherent flaws I mentioned about this test. The Numa sample has less OD either because that was the max OD it was capable of, or it clearly sounded worse when I went beyond that point, I don't remember... but I suspect it was max. For the amount of OD that would have been ideal, check the isolated organ track from the actual Yours Is No Disgrace recording posted earlier, that's the ballpark I was going for, but couldn't always achieve. So as for why I put that much OD on the Kurz, it was because, subjectively, that felt about as close as I could get to that track.

 

I can assure you that my PC3's organ/leslie sounds 100% better than the PC4...Quick adjustments I would make would be to reduce the C/V to C1 (chorus is horrible and cant be user adjusted), reduce the slow rotor throb, slow down the fast horn, significantly reduce the overdrive, center pan both double leslie's.

Unless I screwed up, there should have been no C/V on my sample at all (I didn't use it for any of them). As for changing the speed of the rotor or the horn, that was beyond the level of tweaking I was doing. I made no leslie speed adjustments to any of them (except I think I had the one Vent speed knob at slightly less than its center position). Not only would Leslie top and bottom speeds and accel/decel have led me down a time consuming rabbit hole, but also, I didn't think it mattered much for the main purpose at hand, i.e. comparing the YIND-style big Leslie overdrive sound (the quick up-and-down demo I threw in at the end was incidental, figuring it would be of interest, but was not the focus of what I was doing). Significantly reducing the OD might have made for a better organ sound overall, but I don't think it would have made for a better YIND-ish sound. As for the last, I could be wrong, but I don't think PictureOfNectar uses a double Leslie (much less two of them). But if you'd like to try your hand at a better YIND-ish sound on your PC3 (full drawbar, heavy Leslie overdrive), I'd love to hear what you come up with! Maybe you can post an audio clip, or if you prefer, tell me which preset you started from and what tweaks you made (or better yet, send me your PC3 program file) and I'll duplicate it on the PC4 and I can post it for comparison. (This is the same as what I said to everyone in another post... If you feel you can get a better YIND-ish sound out of whatever it is you have that I tested, I'd love to hear it... I"ve made no claim to be an expert tweaker at any of these.)

[Al Coda]

If doesnt sound like you optimized the PC4 at all. I can assure you that my PC3's organ/leslie sounds 100% better than the PC4.

 

Yep,- I´d 2nd this and it also rules in general for many other sounds done on a PC3 VAST engine, also those w/ KB3 mode included.

 

And the overdrive you applied to the PC4 is way over the top.

 

Over the top or not,- it´s tweakable already in the PC3 and that doesn´t mean overdrive amount only.

Everybody has to live w/ digital overdrive algorithms today, but on a PC3 and I guess a PC4 too, everybody has to deal w/ SEVERAL options of handling gain structure and controlability by velocity, sliders/drawbars being pulled, those drawbar settings and the influence of "foot pedal" controller,- WHEN assigned.

A Kurz KB3 sound CAN sound good enough for at least any live performance,- except the classic organ trio jazz stuff.

Doesn´t mean the machine is not usable for this,- just only other clones sound better/more detailed then.

 

I skipped the rest ...

We shouldn´t leave "tests" and "comparisons" to preset jokeys,- period.

I myself, I don´t use a single factory preset on the PC3 b.t.w.,- I tweaked all I liked,- which were only a few, or made my own.

Its´s time consuming and has a learning curve.

Most buyers will never invest that time.

 

Back to topic:

 

I really like VB3-2 and prefer it over Blue3.

I don´t own but tested ...

I don´t see need to buy any actually,- because EVERY hardware instrument via earphones sounds (actually) better than software to my ears.

I flip between software and hardware all day and get the same impression!

I´d wish it were different because I always wanted to shrink my rig.

 

My fave hardware organ emu IS HX3 !

When I were forced to buy today, I´d opt Mag P2 w/ the full set of preset keys, UHL X4-2 and HX3 expander.

 

I´m more and more done w/ software (and there´s no impulse to pay for anymore).

Some stuff doesn´t respond to MIDI PrgChs. at all, others only do partially by using "MIDI banks" (UHe p. ex.) and suddenly you come across a freebee which does,- this in 64Bit.

It´s insane and there´s always something.

Who REALLY want´s to spend his time with this crap when it becomes essential to get the gig done ?

 

A.C.

 

 

[Tom Williams]

I love this thread!

 

Ditto on PC4 lack-of-optimization comments, as well as appreciation for the effort at all. Let's hope that's not the best stock PC4 sound. The Leslie sounds like a badly adjusted 1975 Maestro phase shifter. Yucch!

 

My PC3 using BillW's Leslie settings (not a stock Kurzweil rotary) has impressed a lot of ears, both locally and at the (final?) Mid-Atlantic hang a couple of summers ago. It has a very nice midrange growl indeed. I think the original Organ patch was Ezra's Burner. I don't have his permission to upload the Leslie at this time, but I will see if I can upload some sample audio in the near future, as a sort of anecdotal rebuttal.

[hardware]

I"ve got all of the B3 software and it"s for the most part pretty authentic, each having different strengths.

But I much prefer my hardware live.

Apple and Microsoft Hammonds don"t have the strength.

But odd that they record better for ensemble work.

Anxious to hear Keyboard Partners new CaM Rotary and 122 Pre Amp.

But we"re spoiled these days. In the 90s I went from a real B3/147 to an Emulator IV and a Dynacord Rotary.

Imagine my torment, then the Pro3 and Voce, etc.

In the last 5 years everything has been a big improvement, software and hardware.

 

[Mark Schmieder]

I never had a chance to listen before the reveal, so it will be interesting to see what I conclude about the tests once I have time (maybe Christmas week; I'm playing in front of quite a few thousand people -- pre-game show so I don't know if it could even be the whole stadium full -- next Saturday and need to focus on prepping around 60 songs I don't know, as it's a sub gig on bass).

 

I didn't remember that the original Numa is based on the KeyB, so I will especially focus on those demos as I've never really heard it in an actual shootout like this one before. It does not surprise me that one of the two top hardware organs topped many people's choices, even though there were a lot of wrong guesses about it being the Hammond series (which is what I currently own). As I never really got familiar with the KeyB distortion, chorus/vibrato, and Leslie, as well as percussion, that will be my main focus for comparison vs. the SK1 (which is similar to my XK-1c).

[Mark Schmieder]

Oh well, I had some software updates to run, so listened during that, and was surprised to find which ones I liked the best (sort of), but for different reasons than I expected.

 

For the Yes song, I give top honours to the Hammond SK1, even though a bit muddy, because it does sound very natural, organic, and balanced, and has to my ears one of the two or three best Leslies overall. It mostly falls down a bit on the distortion, but not overly so.

 

Second place goes to Nord Stage 3, as having the best balance between a big organ sound, some grunge, but no mud, while also sounding organic and not plastic. It would not be my favourite all around, sans distortion, but I think it may have more accurate distortion than the rest, and its Leslie seems to evolve very naturally. I revised my ranking just now due to strange chorusing, so a closer listen did put Hammond back at the top.

 

I give third rank to the original Numa, only because it sounds slightly plastic to me (partly due to note attack, not sustain, and lack of percussion sound), even though it's a nice big open sound and not muddy, and has a really good Leslie. It reminds me a bit of what I remember from the Korg CX3, but those are old memories by now.

 

Software-wise, Blue reminded me more of the Hammond SK1 than any other hardware or software, at those settings. This was not the case when I had trial editions at various times.

 

The three that I could not under any circumstances with live (and did once own and sell) are the IKM modeled product, the Kurz, and the AS hybrid lib (I'm deliberately abbreviating these refs so that I doesn't sound like I disrespect the companies involved or aim to harm them in any way). I find all of them one-dimensional, muddy, inarticulate, inorganic, and unconvincing as well as unemotive.

 

I only like Blue with its distortion off, for mellower Hammond sounds (vs. what is in this demo), and do think the IKM modeled product shows potential -- especially if they improve the options on the Leslie, which currently do not match what I can do on my hardware XK-1c (even when using the standalone plug-in).

 

The Green Eyes Lady demos reinforce these rankings, but with more extreme differences, gaining more hope for the long-term of VB3 and IKM, but finding more flaws with Blue, Numa, and Nord Stage. It's really the percussion more than anything else, that keeps me in the Hammond camp, as it's so important to my reggae/ska sound and even many of my custom jazz patches.

[Theo Verelst]

Listening to the main examples on my big monitoring system which I consider quite neutral thus far, using a well used MG mixer series Yamaha DAC (also used on pretty uch all signal sources thinkable) I am reminded of why those rounded deep loud and warm, and interesting organ tones sound so thin and annoying: those organ tones are not coming through the digital signal path and the final DAC unscaved, and the presumption the organ parameters translate easily to some digital settings is an incorrect one.

 

Too much mid tones come out of those digital machines, way too much distortion and waaaayyyy to little controlled low mid waves to listen to these products with the pleasure a normal organ gives. Then there's the acoustics equation: in order for most people speakers to project a tone to the listened in a normal room like a well used organ would do, even more attention to the immense digital limitations, a preparation for acoustics is then needed more than for most other instruments.

 

I've made progress making organ sounds, and they sound pretty much nothing like the harsh stuff here that woud *not* let me want to play the organ, no thank you, I would hardly be persuaded to take up these digital instruments...

 

T.

[Mark Schmieder]

It's good to know that digital audio is band-limited. Perhaps my company should fold up shop. :-)

[Jazz+]

And here is the big reveal!

 

1. GSI VB3-II

2. Acoustic Samples B5

3. IM Multimedia B3X

4. GG Blue 3

5. Numa Organ (original)

6. Hammond SK1

7. Nord Stage 3

8. Kurzweil PC4

 

[AnotherScott]

SInce B5 came out among the top here, I thought I'd mention that it's currently on sale for 69 Euros (regularly 99). A real bargain next to B3X at $300!

 

I hade a Nord stage 2 and electro 3 and the original Joey deFrancisco Numa.

The Numa sounded great, way more open and a 3d spatial fast leslie effect that did it"s magic in a real room instead of stereo imaging on a recording.

However the Numa"s overdrive was exceptionally bad.... it thought it really sucked.

Interesting since it still managed to come out well in this heavily overdriven comparison. I think it's better than the overdrive I've heard in most hardware organs. But some might say that's damning with faint praise. ;-)

 

If doesnt sound like you optimized the PC4 at all. I can assure you that my PC3's organ/leslie sounds 100% better than the PC4.

Yep,- I´d 2nd this and it also rules in general for many other sounds done on a PC3 VAST engine, also those w/ KB3 mode included.

Ditto on PC4 lack-of-optimization comments...My PC3 using BillW's Leslie settings (not a stock Kurzweil rotary) has impressed a lot of ears...I think the original Organ patch was Ezra's Burner. I don't have his permission to upload the Leslie at this time, but I will see if I can upload some sample audio in the near future, as a sort of anecdotal rebuttal.

Again, I'd love to hear anything better anyone can come up with, for ANY of the organ samples I posted. I'd be interested in two categories of improved settings:

 

... Something simple... i.e. picking a factory preset and making only minimal adjustments to it (my general approach)

... or, for someone who really knows their way around them, something extensively tweaked if it's significantly better

 

and either post it here yourself with you playing, or I can send a MIDI file, or you can send me the program file or instructions on how to create the sound and I'll try to give it a go.

 

We shouldn´t leave "tests" and "comparisons" to preset jokeys,- period.

I myself, I don´t use a single factory preset on the PC3...

Its´s time consuming and has a learning curve.

Most buyers will never invest that time.

...

Who REALLY want´s to spend his time with this crap when it becomes essential to get the gig done ?

But then how do you square not wanting to test boards based on how they sound out of the box ("preset jockeys") with the fact that, as you suggest, most buyers will never use something except as it comes out of the box? Isn't there more value in comparing these things as most people will use them, rather than comparing them based on how almost no one will use them? Personally, I did not have the time nor inclination to learn the ins and outs of all of these, I just did what I could do super easily. But at least, to a certain extent, that kind of kept them on even ground. And this is similarly why I'm interested in more of what I described above as demos with "something simple" settings, which are sounds that are still within easy reach of anyone who owns something, in addition to examples of what someone more dedicated could get out of something.

 

I only like Blue with its distortion off, for mellower Hammond sounds (vs. what is in this demo)

I heard a performer with a great organ sound, and went up at the end and asked what he was using, and it was Blue3. So I know it is capable of some great sounds, even if it wasn't ideal for what I was going after here (or at least, I couldn't easily find it).

 

[AnotherScott]

t"s interesting how when comparing these various options at home I"ll form an opinion and then on a gig my opinion changes. For example, Blue 3 sounded great at home but just very good on a blues rock gig. There"s a liveliness and presence that is missing from many of the options. I think this deficiency shows itself much more in the context of a rock or electric blues band.

That's a good point, which has been mentioned here before more in the context of pianos, but can be true of organ as well... that what sounds best playing solo at home (or when recording a part) isn't always what sounds best playing live with a rock band. Ironically, I have gigged with the poll favorite--Numa Organ with Vent--and felt I had trouble getting it to cut through the full band mix unless I really pushed it. Maybe EQ would have been the answer, but I never really had the time to get to the bottom of it. One of the problems is that we almost never rehearse, so there is little opportunity to try stuff out in a band context when not actually at the gig. And these particular gigs were with a house PA/monitor system besides, so not even any playback gear that I was used to playing through.

[Theo Verelst]

It's good to know that digital audio is band-limited.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by band limited, but it's by and large a matter of reconstruction inaccuracy, which is a mathematical problem related with computing complexity as well as filter length (latency). When acoustics come into play, the problems in some perception areas become squared because those repeated standard and normally used pro DAC ultra short reconstruction filters come together really nasty.

 

Everybody usually chooses to ignore this, or somply know nothing undergrad EE which is about this, but I cannot take digital organs as serious as analogue ones, makes me laugh or cringe. I wouldn't play most of the plugins available, there are some decent ones without the appeal to certain raw sounds on Linux as well (free and open source, .e.g the "Calf" one), but I know from my very accurate sine wave generator experiments those organ principals need to be massaged to sound good through normal DACs, or they sound quite ugly.

 

T

[Jazz+]

Theo, have you played a Crumar Mojo 61?

[Theo Verelst]

Good question: I have not. Isn't that Joey Defrancesco's endorsement? I recall some good show elements from some of his demos and songs, I do have the impression that even with his playing style, the digitals wouldn't have much existence if there was an original Hammond with electronics around in portable form. Maybe some of the sound lends itself for digital recording, it is possible to create such sound. Very difficult in general, though.

 

T

[sosho]

Somebody mentioned the ventilator makes them all sound the same . well maybe . Probably . yep , they do.They sound good with one and more or less ok without one in my humble opinion . nobody got "fast " right , yet except NEO

[Mark Schmieder]

So is NEO still considered the best option for fast then vs. anything on-board the hardware clones or in software plug-ins?

 

I had taken it off my buy list, because I could have sworn several top experts here had said it's not really essential anymore.

[AnotherScott]

So is NEO still considered the best option for fast then vs. anything on-board the hardware clones or in software plug-ins?

 

I had taken it off my buy list, because I could have sworn several top experts here had said it's not really essential anymore.

"Essential" is subjective. The gap is smaller. But over the years, plenty of people have posted things like "VB3 doesn't need a Vent" or yes, "the Numa Organ doesn't need a Vent" -- as this shootout shows, that Numa was better than most, but people found it still benefited from a Vent, so the question may be more one of the cost justifying ever diminishing returns as other things improve. I think it also varies with what style you play and what you're looking for. To some people, a lot of the magic of the Vent is the overdrive... if you're playing jazz, you may not care so much about that, and then the benefit you're paying for may be smaller still.

 

Overdrive aside, my favorite rotary in hardware was probably the Numa Organ 2... I think I actually did like that better than the Vent... but not when overdrive was added to the equation.

[Mark Schmieder]

Thanks for clarifying, and I would agree, but also part of it can be practical concerns, as it's nice to have presets for such stuff and I'm not sure that's easy in a multi-device setup. I put a lot of time into my 100 XK-1c presets, and especially the ones oriented towards jazz, reggae, ska, calypso, etc.

[sosho]

Yes it is a a matter of taste . I rememnber I tried the original Numa and thought it was great except something , the rotary sim . I am now playing the vb3 II but will probably be replacing the rotary with a ventilator next season . Probably means I have only 2 outputs and need to organize output setttings

 

[Delaware Dave]

Yes it is a a matter of taste . I rememnber I tried the original Numa and thought it was great except something , the rotary sim . I am now playing the vb3 II but will probably be replacing the rotary with a ventilator next season . Probably means I have only 2 outputs and need to organize output setttings

It can be accomplished with 1 output. The original and Vent2 have a bypass. So you could route the output through the Vent; if you use the internal leslie set the Vent to bypass and you'll only get the internal leslie; you can also do the opposite, set the internal leslie to "off" so that you get a dry tone, then turn the bypass on the Vent off so that you get the Vent rotary effect.

 

[Jazz+]

What is in the secret to the Vent"s design that makes it sound so good?

[Ken Beaumont]

What is in the secret to the Vent"s design that makes it sound so good?

 

I highly suspect they aren't going to publish that information.

[Mark Schmieder]

There's this highly trained flea circus inside, that do all the spinning.

[Delaware Dave]

What is in the secret to the Vent"s design that makes it sound so good?

Accuracy?

 

[jverghese]

What is in the secret to the Vent"s design that makes it sound so good?

As far as I can tell there's nothing terribly complex technologically about the Ventilator, quite the contrary, it's a rather simple model. However, the designer has made just the right design choices and compromises (some by chance?), capturing the essence and characteristic detail of the Leslie sound.

 

I think what makes the Ventilator so popular is that it's essentially the sound of the Leslie as we are accustomed to hearing it in a mix -- a very balanced and neutral sound, without any disturbing artifacts. In contrast, the raw sound of a real close-miked Leslie is much more complex, featuring rather heavy timbral modulation in addition to FM and AM. In fact, the moving horn has a tendency to really twist and turn the phase of the harmonics, resulting in a 'spicier' sound than what most simulators produce, Vent included. This is especially true when capturing the sound using directional microphones with the rear of the cabinet open.

 

The Ventilator gets many things right -- the volume throb follows real physical laws (sound pressure decreases by the inverse of the square of the distance), the overall frequency response of the cabinet is about right, and the front panel control tapers are well chosen. The overdrive effect is equally 'universal', and sounds good on most anything.

 

There's room for improvement, though. For instance, on a real Leslie, FM depth tends to decrease at fast rotor speeds, while AM and timbral modulation increase somewhat. Too much FM makes the sound a bit too chorusy at fast speeds. Then there's the complex timbral modulation mentioned above that isn't really addressed at all, but would add significantly to the versatility of the model.

 

I've been waiting for manufacturers to develop more elaborate models of the Leslie, but things seem to be moving slowly. The recently introduced Amplitube/IK Leslie is a step up, I think, but it would be nice to see some new hardware as well.

 

[AnotherScott]

For the record, I believe that, had you included the HX3 with a Vent, it would have blown the entire field out of the water.

Here ya' go... HX3 version 4.25 with Vent. HX3 values are factory default except I lowered the output. I know, the new HX3 has a better Leslie and other non-Hammond emulations, but I'm think it should sound pretty much the same this strictly as a Hammond emulator feeding a Vent, maybe someone else could offer some input there.

 

CLICK TO HEAR HX-3 WITH VENTILATOR

 

And now, also of interest, thanks to the generous cooperation of a forum member, here's a MIDI file of the same stuff, played through the new 5.something version of HX3 with its own rotary effect! In this case, there are Green Eyed Lady a few times with different settings... I left them all. It's instructive as to how much variation one CAN get out of these things. I assume the first is the fairest comparison to the others... i.e. no adjustments were made to the sound that had been playing immediately before except for the addition of percussion (and possibly reducing overdrive if the percussion was too badly compromised by the overdrive).

 

CLICK TO HEAR HX-3 VERSION 5, NATIVE ROTARY SIM

 

Note that these HX3 samples have not been normalized (volume adjusted) against each other or against the previous samples. Also, in general, everything was posted as a 320k MP3... however all the little Tull bits EXCEPT for the HX3 examples were posted uncompressed, because they were so tiny anyway. I didn't do that here because, for this purpose, I thought it made sense to present all the samples in a single file.

 

So what do you think? About where do you rank these? Do either/both of these beat your previous favorite?

[Paul Harrison]

#1 (VB3) and #2 (B5) were at the top of my original list, but they were overtaken by #5 (Numa) and #7 (Nord) when a Ventilator was added. Without a Vent, it is now a close contest between #1, #2 and #9 (HX3), and with a Vent, it is a close contest between #5, #7 and #9. The best of the internal Leslies are very good, but the Vent (especially its overdrive) still sounds better to me.