jimkost2002
-
Posts
1,462 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by jimkost2002
-
-
Elmer, I dont have MIDI on my VV, but, I have payed VVs and Rhodes Pianos with MIDI.
They play equally as well as those without.
I have played ALL of the above except the Doepfers.
The Arturia 88 is abysmal.
I agree the Roland is too shallow, but its not as bad as the Seven nor the Keylab88.
The Studio SL 88 grand with the TP40/wood is quite good, but the BEST are the Fortes....(I will be getting a Forte 7 later this year)
-
Mate, you are 100% right about the heavy hammer actions and the Clavinet.....but the other component in that is key REBOUND.....if that return/rebound is too slow, you cant excute the ideas with the right snap, like having bad drum heads.
-
maybe theyll get it right with rev 2, like the Mojo Dual.
meh to the AP, played it for 20 seconds and moved to the EPs and Clav
-
Ok here is my review of the Seven. Interspersed with my comparisons to both my Active VV 73 as well as to various Fender Rhodes and Wurlitzer pianos Ive played in various live and studio contexts throughout my career so far.
Build Quality and general outward aesthetics:
Crumar really hit it out of the park here. The Seven looks like a mini Rhodes with its Tolex base and the Crumar badge on the back, just like a Rhodes or Wurly.
The left side connection panel is also beautifully laid out with reinforced 1/4 connections for L/R, headphones and pedals. USB connection is solid as well.
Also a very sturdy rocker power switch and a coffee connector power cord. Yay, internal power supply! On the RH side, you have an accessories compartment with a thumbscrew locked door. Nice.
On power up, you're greeted by illuminated clear plastic rotary pots and one Bank and eight instrument buttons. The Bank button has 4 banks, one preset, three user.
The clear plastic pots are: Volume, Reverb, two EQ pots that function differently with a press first is simple Bass and Treble, second is Mid and Sweepable Frequency. Oh, the pots function when you press them, differently for a Short (Immediate) and Long (100 milliseconds) press.
To wrap this section, GREAT build quality and aesthetics! Top notch!
Now, to the sounds. I am going to deal with the Rhodes (Tine), Wurly(Reed) and Clav ONLY for the following reason:
I hate the Electric Grand like Mitch Towne hates Combo Organs so that's a non issue for me.I played the originals when they first came out and they were awful then. We only used them because we HAD to. Don't care about FM or other digital EPs either. Cant stand them also and have never had to use them after I stopped using DX7s
If you know other Crumar instruments, especially the Mojo61, you know that the Rhodes, Wurly and Clav are at the top of all electromechanical emulations, surpassing Nord by far and having only Yamaha and Kurzweil (Forte, Weiser and Purgatory Creek) as real rivals in hardware. Pianoteq is Crumars only true rival in the Electromechanical realm besides these competitors.
Now there are a couple of factors that need to be taken into account here:
1) The intrinsic quailty and character of Crumars emulations.
2) How these emulations stack up next to the original instruments.
First, as to the intrinsic nature. Crumar has done INCREDIBLE work here. There is a great, satisfying quality to all phases of the sound attack, decay, sustain and release in all three of these instruments and they are editable to a great degree.
Heres where the failings start to show up.
First of all, the Rhodes sound is like that semi-narrow tight high offset from the pickup mid period Chick sound, not SUPER narrow, like 1975 RTF but very close. You can tame that narrow-ness some what in the editor by adjusting the Pickup Offset parameter. Theres also a weird bell like model starting on C sharp on the last top full octave that I couldnt elimate by tapering the metallic parameter.
Anyone who has even spent a cursory amount of time on a REAL Rhodes knowz that bell-like attack doesn't appear out of nowhere, but it becomes more organically apparrent as you go above middle C.
Second, as good as Crumar's emulation is, you just dont get that true BLOOM that you hear on a REAL Rhodes or that I heard on my VV. Crumar gets damn close, closer than just about anybody, but..... THAT Is the difference. You still miss the vibrating tine or reed under your finger.
I havent discussed the action of the Seven yet, so I might as well not put if off any longer.
This is the real failing, the Achilles Heel of the Seven.
They key travel stops about halfway down, like there's an after touch strip.
The only other keyboard I felt this kind of stop on was the Arturia Keylab 88...followed by the old Roland A-90.
Really, really awkward and almost unplayable. I DID get somewhat used to it after a few hours and some mental and physical gymnastics, but DAMN, Im really disappointed, especially after sitting at my VV and playing that buttery smooth action! Also, it was almost like one of the horrible, un-maintained Rhodes everyone complains about and unfairly judges Rhodes pianos by if they don't know any better....
The Wurly has the traditional A-C compass. All above and. below keys are silent.
Again, Clav is great sounding and the best emuation availabl, but awkward AF with this action.
All FX are GREAT especially delays and phaser.
----------
But that action, man....ugh, ugh, ugh ..... really one of the worst ever
Maybe if they do a rev 2 it'll be worth getting.
As to how the Crumar Wurly stacks up to the original:
Very honorably.
Its closest to a 140B (mid 60s transistor amp) or a 200. You can get some 145B schmutz with a dash of the AMP/DRIVE knob. Like the Rhodes it acquits itself honorably till you get to the decay transient of the sound, THEN you know its an emuation, along with the lack of a vibrating tine/reed underneath your finger or in the cabinet of the instrument.
So, to recap.
Crumar has done an admirable job here, but fallen short in a crucial areathe action.
Maybe theyd have done better with a TP 40. I know the one in the Forte KILLS the TP 100 in the Seven. But maybe they tweaked it? Because I dont remeber ANY Electro HP that Ive played or owned being this difficult. Or maybe Nord tweaked THEIR TP 100s?
But, I'm sending this back for a Mojo 61-that's my utility non-clone electromechanical board from here on.
One more thing: My tests were done with the VV and the Seven running though a Motion Sound KP-500s and a Mackie 1202VLZ 4 alternating with a pair of AKG 712s
.
-
Yes, zoooombiex, what you call contact noise is adjustable .....its called metallic in the Seven tine piano editor.
as to the Wurlitzer phasing you mention, on the Seven that is minimized by going below the mid 70s on the Hammer Hardness prarmeter.
-
Just got my Seven last night.
Ill post later tonight with my initial impressions versus my VV
-
nope
nthing beats a vibrating tne under the fnger
-
me too
i will do an A/B with my VV after Tuesday
-
The Seven sounds good but the reason I put in an order was not because I'm in search of better sounds. What I'm hoping for in the Seven is a more inspirational playing experience for the electromechanical emulations I'm using all the time.
Exactly, Adan.... me too
-
... the one exception being Yamahas Electric and Acoustic Pianos.
What´s so different w/ them ?
I don´t have any newer Yamaha,- so I´m curious.
A.C.
Al, for me it is the playability factor you eloquently describe plus how they sit in a monitor mix.
Also, Ive never been let down by Yamaha in a backline situation.
I just end up asking for some kind of Motif/Montage/CP fot those reasons.
Does that make sense?
-
As much as I like the Crumar Seven's Rhodes-like concept, based on it's demos I think that a Kurzweil Forte would do most if not all of it's sounds better.
JMTC
Sorry bro but no way. The Kurzweil EPs are okay but not even in the same league as the Kronos let alone the Seven. I know this forum has a strong Kurzweil bias due to Dave W's presence but really the sun has set on their VAST architecture. They're milking every last drop out of what they have but really need to move forward to be competitive again.
Again, more misionformation stated as fact here.
Have YOU ever played the Forte with the latest OS?...
IF SO, can YOU cite the real, discernable differences between it and the PC/K series instruments it replaces/supercedes?
It is in a different league from earlier K boards, Forte being the new flagship Kurz board...
All the theater/Tour guys are stil using PC 3/K due to legacy and interface perferences, but that may change in time.
The Forte is being constantly updated and having new features (sequencers, etc) added.
My own emulator EP picks for sturdiness in the heat of battle are Yamaha and Modartt, followed by Crumar and Kurz. Korg has great EPs but is knocked out of contention by the HORRIBLE RH3
-
As much as I like the Crumar Seven's Rhodes-like concept, based on it's demos I think that a Kurzweil Forte would do most if not all of it's sounds better.
JMTC
Ive used a Forte 7 as well as Mojo61 and Gemini....
(Havent tried Purgatory creek yet)
In my recording, touring experience (in dealing with emulators) Physical Modeling ALWAYS TRUMPS SAMPLING.....
Kurzweil's VAST engine is not just a sample player.
I am well aware of VAST having broader capabilities than sample playback.
Al described these factors and others going into sound design quite well.
I am NOT saying ALL physical modeling trumps ALL other techniques just that the playability of the BEST physical modeling (Crumar, Modartt) trumps other techniques regarding playability, the one exception being Yamahas Electric and Acoustic Pianos.
-
As much as I like the Crumar Seven's Rhodes-like concept, based on it's demos I think that a Kurzweil Forte would do most if not all of it's sounds better.
JMTC
Ive used a Forte 7 as well as Mojo61 and Gemini....
(Havent tried Purgatory creek yet)
In my recording, touring experience (in dealing with emulators) Physical Modeling ALWAYS TRUMPS SAMPLING.....
However, Im always reminded of the quote by the great Rumanian Conductor Celibidache when asked to describe the difference between Live Performance and Recordings:
Its like making love to a picture of Brigitte Bardot as opposed to the flesh and blood Woman
We will see how good the Sevens picture is soon enough
-
I'm not as down on the TP100 action as some folks. When I had an Electro HP I got used to it quickly and even came to like it. But it's not particularly Rhodes-like. In fact it's not like any keyboard I've ever played. I think they picked TP100 for the Seven because it keeps the overall weight down, not because it feels like a Rhodes or any other keyboard emulated by the Seven.
Adan, perfectly stated! I couldnt agree more, I have had EXACTLY that experience with the Electro HP as well and that is my trepidation regarding the Seven. But I will report back when i get mine.
-
Totally agree with Moe here. The actions on most real Rhodes I seen in the wild are crappy, the TL100 being much nicer.
So (to use a car analogy), if I drove a few (less than 10) 1966 Mustangs that were poorly maintained, if at all and then drove 1 or 2 slightly above that quality and then said Most 1966 Mustangs Ive seen in the wild drove like crap and somebody came along and said Yeah, but it sounds like you had bad experiences and thats not the standard, just what happened to you would you keep defending your less extensive, but valid SUBJECTIVE experience against the standard of others with more experience?
That being said, I am looking forward to trying the Seven in 2weeks and will report on it as compared to my VV
-
You miss my point. I did everything I could to make the action of my Rhodes better. I did the pedestal mod. Moved the felt from the hammers to the keybase so that smooth plastic moved against felt instead of wood. Lubricated the hammers. This was not an unmaintained instrument. I spent months working on it! It was an instrument that despite all my efforts continued to play like crap.
I'm happy you have had better luck than I have, but I stand by my personal experiences.
I didnt miss your point.
I totally hear YOU had a difficult instrument that YOU did everything in your power to make work for you.
I just know that I can only do things up to a certain point, then I take it to the pros.
And I would say that 105 (that I can recall since I started in this biz) statistically trumps a mere 1 or a handful.
-
Bump mods do not a great action make. Been there, tried that. One could say it makes it suck a bit less.
Don't know about their actions. I only know that exactly 2 Rhodes pianos I have ever played had an action I liked and could play without feeling impeded, vs dozens that sucked. Curiously, the two good ones were Suitcase 76s. Don't know if that is a clue or not. My own torture device was an 88 Stage.
Dude, there ARE A LOT of unmaintained Rhodes pianos out in the wild with bad actions, but dont throw the proverbial baby out with the bath, please!
Chris Carroll, Ken Rich, CEPco and Retrolinear are just some of many who are upholding great standards to keep vintage instruntments up to the standard they deserve.
Ive been fortunate to have played many a great Rhodes pianos from all eras, and that is just baseless reasoning, although that same mindset seems to be rampant here.
-
US ship expected by end of March....
EU is shipping now, I believe....
-
The one thing that seems to be glossed over in these discussions is how attack, decay, sustain and release components occur in the original instruments and how they are dealt with in the emulations.
It seems to me sample based engine get attack and initial decay right bur they suck on the subsequent Sustain and release factors.
The Gemini and Mojo engines seem to do a goos job on all parts of ADSR. I expect the Seven to behave similarly.
-
38-ish lbs (seven without lid) is HARDLY COMPARABLE to a Wurly in weight
-
Its a different form factor and considering my problems were with the Mojo Dual and not the 61....my issues with the 61 were with the Hammond ergonomics and sound. I really liked the extra sounds (EP, clavs and Vox/Farf).
So, since the 61 is a newer product, one can surmise they have learned their lessons and will continue on an upward trajectory.
-
To the naysayers and head scratchers:
As a gigging/studio musician, I totally get what Crumar is trying to do heretake the good stuff embodied in the extra sounds of the Mojo 61 and wed them to a hammer action and a retro look for those who need and desire these sounds.
As far as the bitching about the TP 100,- I totally get Andrea and Guidos decision to use it. IT IS AN EP FIRST BOARD!!!!!
In my experience with the HP Nord Electros (I have owned the 3 and 4 HPs and had the 5 on backline) the EP sounds worked exteremly well with TP 100. I dont know if Clavia modded it or not, but it was a very playable solution for my needs.
Didnt love it on the AP side, but it was good enough....
As far as weight, you can always use hand trucks and Rock and Rolla Carts.
Im well into my 5th decade, luckily healthy and fit, but for my less fortunate contemporaries, there are always workarounds!
I think the tolex seems pretty sturdy. Ive used the Mojo Dual with the tolex finish and it seemed like it could hold up for the long run.
The Rhodes-ish design really made me smile! Ive not had the greatest experince with Crumar build quailty, but I will give them plenty of latitude here.
I gotta say, bitching about a board none of us have in hand adds nothing to the dialog. A lot of cats have been wanting these sounds in a seperate board and youre about to get it. The first iteration may need a few revisions to hit the sweet spot , but lets reserve judgment until weve tried it!
I have pre-ordered mine and look forward to trying it out! If it fits my needs, it will be my go to board for EP gigs. (My VV is for studio only)
As to the SV-1 comparison, this could blow it out of the water. I know it will already as far as the action is concerned. The SVs best feature was the tube preamp
As far as a Forte comparison, I love the Forte and plan to purchase one, but they are two different beasts and in my experience, sampling EPs (Nords) never sound right past the initial attack transient. I really liked the EPs on the Mojo61 and really like those on Pianoteq so I am hopeful!
I applaud Crumar for what they have done in the past, are doing here and will continue to do going forward!
-
I had to return 2 (TWO) Mojo dual manuals that had issues OUT OF THE BOX......
The 61 I had briefly seemed to be better, but the push buttons didnt inspire confidence...the chicken head knobs were sturdy....
-
my fear also
Crumar Seven
in The Keyboard Corner
Posted
Its that high harmonic present when the pickup is adjusted away from the tine.
Best known in the Dyno sound which emphasizes said high harmonic.