Reezekeys

Aspen, thanks for the perspective, I appreciate the thorough reply! Of course I'd be interested to hear what a tube amp might sound like with my laptop rig. Maybe someday I'll get that chance. Once at a rehearsal studio I used a Twin to play my Rhodes sample set, it sounded awesome (not so good on AP sounds as one might expect). I think the speaker & cab must have a say in shaping the sound too though. When both a SS and tube amp are not close to clipping, what is the tube amp doing differently? Adding subtle harmonic distortion not present in SS amps? Or is it how they couple to speakers? This could probably open a can of worms, I know the tube vs SS debate has been going on a long time and I don't mean to start anything! I know that for my gigs I really need clean, punchy (i.e. fast slew rate), low-noise amplification with tons 'o headroom for those times I have to dig in. Maybe what you're taking about is more of a product for the recording studio than a traveling musician's arsenal.

Yes this is what I've always heard tube amps have that "natural" compression and they also tend to distort in more "pleasing" ways when driven hard, than SS amps. I understand why audiophiles might prefer that sound for their home stereos. I'm not quite sure if that would carry over to someone playing in a loud r&b band at their local bar, over the general noise of the bar patrons watching sports on the big screens while you're playing!

Not to doubt you but I've always heard that tube amps compress naturally as they approach saturation. I would think that the transients from a dynamic acoustic piano sample set would need a pretty powerful tube amp to be able to play loudly while having headroom available for transients. And powerful tube amps means large power transformers which could mean added weight. Not to rain on any parade and I'd be happy to be educated more on this topic, if not proven wrong completely!

I remember reading that QSC found it cheaper to put two identical 500 watt amp modules, rather than two different wattage modules. Of course 500 watts to a horn is overkill, but it certainly gives one peace of mind that you will never send a clipped signal into that horn! I'm guessing they use their internal DSP to maintain the signal sent to the HF amp at a reasonable level otherwise QSC would be replacing a whole lot of horns!

Yes if memory serves the DSP128 was one of the first multi-effects units. I still have mine too, although it's been many a year since any electrons have moved through it. The SRV2000 was a very well-regarded reverb in its day also good for frying eggs on it's top! I still have that too. Maybe someday when these things achieve "vintage" status and people start hankering for the "cold" sound of aliasing digital audio, I'll make a killing on them...

IIRC the old Peavey keyboard amps had a built-in non-defeatable limiter. Couldn't think of a worse way to amplify a keyboard rig. Looks like this is turning into a nostalgia thread my rig back in the old days was a Carver PM800, bridged, into a JBL 3-way cab (forgot the #, it had a 15", mid & horn). I used a TOA D3 mixer and either a Roland SRV-2000 reverb or a Digitech DSP128 efx processor. The TOA is still pretty useful - 1U, four channels with an XLR & mic pre on one of them, and quiet.

Just to clarify something here a true close-miked stereo acoustic piano sample, when the left & right channels are panned hard left & right, will give a somewhat panned perspective - but this is nothing at all like what I used to have in my old Roland XP50's "Nice Piano" mono piano samples panned across the stereo field according to "key position." This in no way was "stereo." Your description kind of implies this type of pseudo-stereo imaging. IMO, true stereo acoustic piano samples are for creating a full sensation of being inside a space not having different sounds come out of each side. This seems to be exactly what the SpaceStation amp is designed for and I would very much like to hear what my rig would sound like through one. I have to admit it would take a lot to tear me away from my two QSC K8s though! And not to derail but I wanted to say something about Aspen's contention that "FOH is almost always Mono" In my experience touring the last year, playing large clubs, outdoor festivals and casinos, I've found the opposite to be true.

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?

I spent some time with the FA06. I'm used to my Roland A800 Pro controller which also has a synth-feel keyboard but the 06 feels like a new design, or at least one that hasn't been on the Roland controllers I've used (I had an Edirol PCR-M80 before the A800 Pro). The up-down travel seems shorter. It was not as satisfying for me to play. I don't think the difference was due to the lack of aftertouch vs. AT on my A800 - my PCR-M80 has no aftertouch and it's keybed feels the same as my A800. Can't really comment on the other features or the sounds since I'm a laptop guy. The piano is probably fine for most people but not up to what I'm used to. Then again, I spent some time playing the Fazioli, which put a whole new perspective on things!

Eight DIN-midi output jacks? In this day & age? Weird, but what do I know.