CyberGene

That's actually true since at the time I only used to listen to Lingus as audio and hadn't watched the video, so I missed non-music related context such as that.

I am a Snarky Puppy fan since the beginning and I remember liking the famous Lingus solo at the time while it hasn't still generated the cult following. I may have listened to this track more than the rest exactly because of that solo, I mean it's a very good one. Fast forward a few years later and YouTube is full of some enormous craze about that solo and everyone is talking about it as though it's the best keyboard solo in the world ever and forever. And I just can't understand why that is. I mean, it's indeed a good solo with a lot of energy, etc. but to me it's mostly a well-shredded synth solo that starts with semi-random Gospel chords that are there to create an intimidation rather than follow any logical harmonic development, and the actual synth lines are full of mostly technical chops without anything revolutionary or advanced from an improvisation point of view. I don't feel there's any advanced development or musical thought put into that solo but it might be just me, judging by how many people seem to talk about that solo as the best solo in the world. I know this sounds like a rant and once again: it's indeed a very good solo but why has it become so overhyped? Wondering if I'm the only one.

The zone control helps indeed, I've been using it with my Behringer Model D. But even after more than a year, I still feel confused by the concepts of the MODX and can never do anything quickly. I purchased this board for gigging but whenever I'm rehearsing with the guys and I decide to make a split or something like that, it's a frustrating and embarrassing experience where people have to wait for me to scr*w around with the interface and I certainly look like I don't know what I'm doing which is kind of true. Maybe the problem is in me though. But then I'm a software developer, tech savvy, I can program synths and I can certainly program the MODX, yet I just can't get accustomed to its peculiarities... To me it seems more like a studio board. As to Rhodes, I can recommend the free Chick Corea set that can be downloaded from the Yamaha website: it covers all my needs and there are some wonderful performances there too that one can use to further edit and prepare his own sounds.

Now that we have refaceCP -> CP73/88 and refaceYC -> YC61/73/88, how likely it is to have a full blown virtual analog like e.g. a brand new CS61 in your opinion and will you be interested? Or is the market now overcrowded with analogs and VA-s?

They are both slightly below 500MB each and so can be installed together. BTW, the Chick"s one is only Rhodes samples, whereas Purgatory Creek contains Wurlitzer, Clavinet and Pianet samples. If they offered only the Rhodes samples (two types AFAIK) it would have been 200MB and cheaper. I personally don"t care about the other samples, I"m interested only in Rhodes sound, so it"s a bit of waste for me which is another reason to be hesitant. They both sound very pleasant to my ears. But I still have a slight preference towards Chick. Also because I loved the guy and have grown up listening to many of his records and his Rhodes piano. P.S. Sorry I misread your question, I thought you were asking about installing both Chick and PC Rhodes. To your question, yes, it"s exactly what I have on my MODX: the Bosendorfer and Chick Cores Rhodes and there"s 80-90 MB free space left if I remember correctly.

I don't see the free Chick Corea's Mark V Rhodes mentioned: https://shop.usa.yamaha.com/en/chick-s-mark-v-montage.html?_ga=2.8438002.63225256.1621152504-136763918.1621152504 I think it's a great one and is free. Haven't purchased the Purgatory Creek one, so can't compare but judging from the demos I prefer the Chick's one.