ElmerJFudd
-
Posts
13,407 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by ElmerJFudd
-
-
Rhodes engine using amp simulation:
[video:youtube]
with phaser (preset n. 2-1):
[video:youtube]
-
Replacing the Mojo 61 AP with the modeled AP could boost Mojo sales And be good for Crumars already good reputation, imo. The AP is the sound in the Electro that trumps the Mojo 61. The current Mojo 61 has great organ, Rhodes, Wurly, Clav, and a better action. The Mojo 61 AP sounds okay, BUT the finger to sound connection is not good . It simply lags and is not sufficient for fast single note lines. That is why I never really play it. The modeled AP would hopefully resolve that and connect better to the response of the action trigger points...finger to sound behavior enhancement is needed with current version.
It could - however we haven't heard an example of the Seven's acoustic piano model that sounds like what you get on a CP4, the Nord Library or Pianoteq for that matter. And the acoustic piano is again included begrudgingly on what is meant to be an instrument focused on electric piano sounds. That said, depending on how editable - we might be able to coax a convincing AP out of the Seven as is possible with the CP80/70 model.
-
Casio gets love because it's light to carry, it's priced well - has great value with regard to the sample and synth engines, and has a remarkably piano like action at this weight and price.
You have to spend over $2.5k to get the Forte sounds with a TP100 action and it still weighs 40.8lbs. Kurzweil recognizes the issue and so they developed the SP6 to get into Casios price/weight range but they had to source a different action yet again through Medeli. Kurzweil beats Casio on sound design but I'm not sure about action here or build quality.
The Seven is a lot of money for a TP100 when compared with a Forte SE. But obviously the Seven's build is solid and it looks feels and vibes like an analog. So hard to compare these two even at similar price point. The Kurzweil is obviously more capable feature/function wise.
Where the Seven does well on price is when compared to Waldorf Zarenbourg and Yamaha CP1, even Nord Piano 3 - though the Yamaha balanced action is best imho for EPs though weight is all over the place on these.
-
On LHB you'll need their next digital that emulates the Fender Rhodes Piano Bass.
This is always the issue when building a digital that feels like an instrument but then we cry about what it doesn't do that a workstation does. What to put in and what to leave out - and make a price point - always a conundrum.
-
Somewhere ... probably 10-12 pages back I mentioned Mr. Ray. I was curious if this keyboard runs Mr. Ray. I always liked Ray.
We could say that it all started from there, but it's not quite the same as the plugin... None of the sounds running in the Crumar or GSi hardware products has much in common with the plugins, because at some point I had a fresh start with all of the sounds I had already made in the past.
By the way, here's a new video.
Right, there's a lot to work with here to get what you're after. Cool.
[video:youtube]https://youtu.be/C0TCAj2xqfs
-
I do enjoy the variation in tone the DX and CP give to keyboard playing, as well as the Tine and Reed instruments. Both in band and solo context on a long gig, it's pleasing both to listener and me to have a variety of timbres - and the right ones for the song in some cases.
The real DX has a rounder, fatter more mellow tone than the model in the Seven (as presented). I would attribute this to the DA conversion in the Seven compared to the Yamaha DX7. And the difference in the CPs related to digital vs. analog sound source and the colour of the converters. Maybe Crumar can give us an idea of what they are using on their Gemini hardware with regard to the DAC. Obviously they can't change the DAC for every instrument they are trying to emulate so perhaps some magic can be made with filters, eq and the amp simulators when going direct.
There is amp simulation in the Seven - and obviously these recordings are direct and we are going to get a different tone depending on what we are using for amplification live.
-
Hi, Dan. Is it that you find the sound of the Yamaha CP80/70 plinky with little sustain or just GSi's model?
In an earlier A/B video in the thread he shows how the model matches up against the real thing.
[video:youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1Y2Bz50P-M
-
CP Engine
[video:youtube]
-
Elmer - When Justin Bieber is playing on the oldies station, it'll be time for me to take a nice long dirt nap.
I hear you. We're approaching having to keep The Stones and Beatles in the set list to appease grandma and grandpa. I remember when that's what Sinatra and Nat King Cole was for. It's a strange new world, always.
-
I played Whitney and Hall & Oats all thru the 80's (but not Foster era Chicago - a man's gotta have some standards.)
But I played NONE of it on a FM piano sound. I used a real Rhodes with phaser, or an MKS-20 Rhodes sound, or a Baldwin ElectroPro - ANYTHING but that abominable sound!
Heretic! Sacrilege! -
LOL what if the band leader calls Whitney, Luther, Chicago, Hall & Oats, George Michael or tons of other stuff from the 80s? There's certain gigs where you don't get to pretend an era of music didn't exist because your personal preference are wired to the 60s and 70s. If the audience loves disco you play it, no? I guess some folks can afford to be picky and refuse tunes. To each their own. But I'm hearing 80s stuff on oldies stations now and not so much Cream, Allman's, Hendrix and Dylan. Time waits for no man. It's gotten real hard to keep up with what's popular right now, too. 90s and 2000s are over and 2010s almost too. When the heck did that happen!?
-
And way overpriced - especially those that need a significant bit of rehab. I'd love to refurbish an old Rhodes...I'd put the money into new components, but only if I could find a throw-away, or exceedingly cheap fixer-upper. Even complete wrecks seem to fetch a pretty penny. No thanks.
In the unboxing vid, the Seven seems to be a bit smaller than I thought. Seems much more manageable than I assumed.
It's the time needed to work on them yourself or the money needed to get a good shop to work on it. Mine sounds great but plays like poop. It needs the bump mod desperately. Whenever I get the idea I'll sit down and get into it - something else around on the house needs my attention. And if it's a hobby I'd rather play on it than work on it, if that makes sense.
-
I still wish they had put the TP-40 in it - but I realize it would be heavy.
Yeah, it would probably bring the 51.8 lbs (with cover/legs) up over 60 lbs. And the 33 of the unit itself to over 40. But it was also interesting to hear the perspective that the TP-100 could actually be better for Rhodes emulation, which is its focus.
Yeah, caseless the Yamaha CP1 is 60lbs. That's another one that would have stayed home.
The SL88 Grand w/ TP40W is 45.8lbs with 88keys
Forte 7 is 41.4lbs with TP-40L, 88k version is is 48lbs both minus case.
It's obvious from the design that Crumar really wanted us to consider gigging with the Seven. Would be fun to see them issue other sizes like Fender Rhodes (a keyboard bass model!?) and Yamaha CP. Maybe the 88k version can have the TP-40W.
-
...I think if I was going to grab something like this to keep at home and not gig with, I'd probably just get another Fender Rhodes Stage 73 at that price, which, again, is not the market they're after...
True, in the US it is possible to pick up the real thing, or even a modern incarnation like the Vintage Vibe Electric Piano. However, there are some benefits to this being a digital instrument (even if they didn't take advantage of everything about digital - like the Forte or similar does). The Seven does offer models of pretty much all the electric pianos of the past that would take up an entire room of your house and all would require maintenance. It does Rhodes, Wurly, and CP70 - plus bonus DX, MKS, Acoustic Piano, and anything is possible to be added later via the Sample Player. It looks, feels and operates like an analog but it isn't. If it really sounds good, it's tempting to ditch the analog and get a room in your house back.
I still wish they had put the TP-40 in it - but I realize it would be heavy.
Had they done this - it would be pretty killer with a Kronos 61 on top.
Or even better - a Forte 61k or 76k synth action - whenever that version might appear.
-
Can we assume the FM Brass and pad patches are samples?
Guido said earlier in this thread the 6 operator FM synth is specifically for generating the DX epiano.
Is there a manual yet?
What samples are shipping in this instrument along with the modeling engines?
Sounds in FM synthesis and PAD are not sampled. Yes, manual is available to download in our web pages, here you will find details about physical modeling sounds and sampled sounds.
OK, I better understand what Guido meant in his reply and quote from the manual.
The 6 Operator synth provides:
...the FM synth inside the Seven (and Gemini) was made to recreate only the E.PIANO1 patch, that uses DX7's algorithm n.5. The other 8 variations are different uses of the same algorithm.
A quote from the manual:
"This instrument has only one parameter, which offers 9 variations of sound using the same algorithm, among which we also find an
organ, a brass section, a bass and a marimba, of course all with that FM taste that is not actually focused at realism."
-
Can we assume the FM Brass and pad patches are samples?
Guido said earlier in this thread the 6 operator FM synth is specifically for generating the DX epiano.
Is there a manual yet?
What samples are shipping in this instrument along with the modeling engines?
-
It does look like fun - its wrong for 95% of my gigs but I know there are others where this is right up their alley paired with the Mojo and/or a synth. Id like to have it at home and forget about acquiring all the instruments that inspired it (I also liked the concept of the Zarenbourg for similar reasons but its way too expensive). A lot less time and space consuming and obviously more economical. The action would be consistent rather than hit or miss. Although there is a digital tendency to turn over instruments for something newer as tech advances. Will the hardware platform they chose be enough to run new and improved models? The acoustic piano model I realize is included at this time as ancillary - but as Guido spends brain cycles on it (assuming there is a soft spot in his heart for the sound of a fine acoustic piano) it could be improved. Plus the 9th engine is sample playback - so anything theyd like to include is possible.
-
With a 6 operator software FM synth on board is it possible to import FM patches? Or if you dont want to open that to users. Could GSi add additional sound patches later? What patches have already been included? Any pads and strings?
-
Good points. Where the inspirational instruments are not easily come by. A digital look/sound/function/feel alike is probably even more desirable than in places where if you wanted a Rhodes, Wurly or even VV model - you could get your hands on it.
-
Imho the advantage of a digital in addition to needing little maintenance is not being limited by analog instruments limitations, especially the sound set. But also save and recall of sounds and fix as presets. The Seven isnt just a digital Rhodes, right from inception its supposed to replace the need to drag your wurly and DX etc. around too. Digital instruments dont need to be limited by ththe range of the source instruments either.
Theyll probably concede some more tones as time goes by like th did with the Mojo61. Added value to spur sales as the wave of ill try it buys begin to taper off.
-
Just had opportunity to listen to the acoustic piano modeling engine in the Seven on the Crumar product page (Chopin Demos).
http://www.crumar.it/?a=showproduct&b=36
Its just not very good. Especially when compared with the success they are clearly having with the electro mechanical modeling in this instrument. The 9th engine is sample playback. The question is how much storage they have on this incarnation of the Gemini hardware. What samples from their collection will they be including and can they do a great acoustic piano if enough customers bitch about it? If you really want to get this board, Jazz+, ask them for a great vibes preset too, fingered upright bass and fingered Fender P through an Ampeg as well.
You never know until you ask. Id ask for user sample support in sf2 format on all their Gemini based products since the storage is there and it would make up for any niche things like vibes. The Dexibell module has storage space for user samples in sf2.
-
Correct. They trickled down most of the engines and removed deep editing.
Although some felt the sampled EPs on the SV-1 were more to their taste.
-
The Seven is what it is. Dont need to play it to see what theyve made.
Its a very cool digital retro styled board for EP sounds.
If you need more from a board at this price/weight (I do) its not the right pick for you. I felt the same about the Mojo61. Does what it does well, cant waste the location in my setup for a retro organ with EP sounds I dont want to play on the action anyway.
And in a nut shell. If you get a Mojo61 and Seven to pair your shit out of luck for quality acoustic piano sounds, a programmable synth, brass strings reeds.
Guido has been clear that the concept is not to compete on functionality but do digital imaginings of the electro mechanicals he loves. The other stuff is not the focus. So for some of us (me included) were out on practicality.
If you do certain types of gigs you show up hours before hand with rolling carts and your job in the band is organs and EPs this is a hot rig. If show up for gig alone in tux a half hour before playing and need to change location twice during the evening this is not the rig for you. Also not good for pit gigs unless its a 70s show. But if you like the sound of the Gemini they do a rack and a desktop.
That said. To play at home or with friends on occasional rock/blues/funk/soul gigs at the corner bar the setup would be fun to have. But I wouldnt make any money on it and its a luxury expense. But hey, everyone makes their own decisions. When I retire, the house and car are paid for, kid is done with college and I can get something just for me - whole different story.
-
Can you please tell me, apart from VSTs and plugins, how many hardware instruments are present in market now with modeled acoustic and their prices?
I think the only fully modeled APs in hardware are from Roland. First only in the pricey V-Piano, but now also in the RD2000. Maybe some/all of the RD800, FP90, FP60.
And every one of the modeled acoustic pianos without fail still generate doubt in players as to their realism in timbre compared to sampling. Although good feeling latency wise and the way the timbre various throughout the velocity range. So, if they were to change their mind at a later time, I would suggest sticking with working on creating a sample based or hybrid instrument for the time being. Unless some killer advancement in acoustic piano modeling becomes open source.
Sweeping generalisation based on other peoples comments. "If they don't like I don't like it".
There is almost 100% acceptance of modelled Hammond, be it VB3, the Legend, UHL, Nord or Roland. Preferences vary as to which flavour of modelled organ they prefer. Do all these modelled efforts "without fail generate doubt in players"?
Pianoteq generates as much praise as it does criticsm so as a mainstream modelled AP it is certainly not true that "without fail generates doubt in players".
It is true that Pianoteq generates doubt in SOME players, but please let us have an example of a sampled AP that without fail NEVER generates doubt in players.
None of the modelled Hammond's are open source.
Why does a modelled piano have to be open source before it will be acceptable to you?
What's the problem with developers owning their own code and how does code ownership influence the sound of the software?
I think Crumar are to commended for innovating and introducing modelled AP's and EP's across the board and moving on from sampled instruments. Sampling has been with us for 40 or more years and the sounds still don't satisfy many.
Time to move on to modelling and this initiative could not be in better hands than Guidos's, a proven skilled and expert developer.
Misinterpretation of what I'm saying. Or I didn't express it clearly. No worries.
The point about debate over sampling vs. modeling on acoustic pianos (less so on EPs and Organs) is just factual. Players debate what sounds better to them all the time. But I'll share personal opinion if that's better. There are a few models in Pianoteq that to me are quite good. Playable, expressive and for stretches of time have me lulled into enjoying the timbre as very acoustic-like. There's still moments where my ear goes "well that right there isn't what I expected" and then I load up one of the good sample libraries to compare. GSi's EP and Organ models have been excellent for a long time (long before the hardware platform). Always attention to detail and character that comes off as authentic. Also excellent work on the FX we love to hear with these electro mechanical instruments. The acoustic piano is a bugger to get right in modeling. Roland's V-Piano tech is just ok (for me). I think in hardware the CP4 is preferable sounding on APs than the RD-2000. To my ear, I don't believe Roland or Physis are any further along than Pianoteq on getting great results for acoustic pianos with modeling. Could always change tomorrow and I hope it does and that GSi does it. The Gemini/Seven/Mojo need some excellent acoustic sounds in them to match the amazing work done on the EPs and Organs. Entirely opinion, take or leave, ignore, again - no worries.
re: open source
the wheel doesn't have to be reinvented all the time. if pieces of the modeling puzzle that are successful were shared between developers it's just my hope that GSi and others could jump into getting some respectable modeled APs running on an instrument like the Seven or what have you.
Heretic! Sacrilege! 
You never know until you ask. 
Crumar Seven
in The Keyboard Corner
Posted
That's the issue. It's a lot to drag out this beast as your piano when it's not great for acoustic piano. I haven't seen anything to change my opinion from what's been shared. The piano on the Mojo61 isn't competitive either, though at any static point it rings like the piano it was sampled from.
So you need a module, laptop or something with the Seven to do solo piano work. It's otherwise pretty cool. Acoustic Piano is someplace Guido could spend some time, particularly because the other timbres in their collection are good to excellent.
Jazz+ has the Mojo61 and is asking for the piano model from the Seven because he isn't satisfied with how the piano in the Mojo61 plays. That's unfortunate and a totally fixable situation.