Help me with Hammond X** Lineage

[Jon May]

So which came first, the chi... XK1 or the XK2? I always presumed they were released in numerical order, but on an eBay listing for an XK2 I read "It was superceeded in the last couple of years by the internationally award winining XK-1 and XK-3c keyboards."

Now just because I read it on the In-t-net doesn't make it so.

[Mark Schmieder]

I think it may make some logical sense to Hammond-Suzuki, as the XK-2 may actually fall midway between the current XK-1 and XK-3c models price-wise and feature-wise (I'd have to check).

 

Probably more significant is the letter change from XB to XK. But I don't even remember which order those came in and whether the XK-2 came after the XB's.

 

Frankly, I gots my XK-1 so don't care. :-) Bring on the XK-4!

[richwhite9]

See chart here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?title=Talk:Hammond_organ#Clones

[richwhite9]

XK-2 was a rush replacement for the ill-fated XB-1 IIRC. Leslie Sim on new ones (XK-1, XK-3C) are much better.

 

 

[Sven Golly]

See chart here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?title=Talk:Hammond_organ#Clones

 

Your link is to a portion of the page lower down than the history chart (and, it's to the discussion page on Wikipedia, not the verified page, but the dates seem close enough and the order of the X* boards are correct, so it'll do here... ).

 

The direct link is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?title=Talk:Hammond_organ#New_Section:_History.

 

[JMcS]

The XK-3 came out in '04. It used the sound engine that was developed for the New B3 which was introduced a couple of years earlier. The XK-1 came out in 05 IIRC, although it uses the same sound engine as the XK-3 it has improved DSP capability and a better digital Leslie. The XM-2 which is basically an XK-1 without the keyboard and the Extra Voices came out several months later.

 

The XK-3c came out in late 2007. It has a new sound engine that takes advantage of several years of advancements in computing and DSP power. The New B3 MkII came out in either late 08 or 09. It uses the same sound engine as the XK-3c.

 

[Jon May]

Cool - I think that about covers it. Thanks all.

[Outkaster]

There is a HUGE difference in an XK-2 and XK-1. The sound is not even the same.

[CEB]

I'm probably in the minority but I liked the XB-2 better than the XK-2. The XB sounded like it had more guts. The keys were nicer on the XK but the one I tried sounded wimpy.

[Jon May]

There is a HUGE difference in an XK-2 and XK-1. The sound is not even the same.

I presume the XK-1 sounds the better of the two? (Still checking my understanding of the lineage).

[CEB]

Yes.

[Mark Schmieder]

Sorry if my post wasn't clear enough, but the history chart should explain it all.

 

I was speculating on why it was called the XK-2 and then followed by the XK-1 and XK-3, but I think my guess was off: more likely they called it the "2" as the second generation, and switched the letter code from "B" to "K" due to the impending re-release of the "real" B3 (with "K" probably standing for "keyboard" vs, "M" for "module", in the prosumer line).

 

I didn't realise the XK-3c was a generation beyond the XK-1 sound-engine wise; I thought it was mostly about the improved Leslie and other effects quality vs. the original XK-3.

 

In other words, now I have more G.A.S. for an XK-3c. :-)

[HammondDave]

The XK3c is much improved over the XK3 and and XK1. Especially the leslie sim...

[Mark Schmieder]

Please, stop giving me G.A.S.!

 

M-U-S-T C-O-N-T-R-O-L X-K-3-C G-A-S

 

Of course, if the gas escapes, the XK4 will be released next week...

[Mark Schmieder]

I found printouts of an old post from summer 2007 or thereabouts, which had a fair number of regulars here saying that the XK-1 action was more realistic than the XK-3's (a bit heftier -- though of course it eventually all comes down to preference).

 

I seem to recall that the XK-3c uses the revised keybed mechanism of the XK-1 vs. the same one that is found in the XK-3c? I didn't find this info when I searched for it just now.

 

The original product update sheet doesn't mention a new keybed vs. the XK-3:

 

http://www.hammondorganco.com/readmoreXK3c.htm

 

[JMcS]

The keybed in the XK-1 is a standard Fatar keybed. The keybed in the XK-3/3c is a proprietary keybed manufactured specifically for Hammond. The manufacturer also makes keybeds for one or more of the major piano manufacturers. Unfortunately, I can't remember the name of the company. It is the same keybed that is used in the New B3 series but without the circuitry for the 9 contacts.

 

The keys on the XK-3/3c and lower manuals all extend 2" back into the case to extend the pivot point so that the arc of the key travel is very similar to if not exactly like that of a traditional Hammond. The visible portion of the keys on my XK keybeds matches the keybeds of my M2 and M3 exactly.

 

There is a side view picture of the New B3 keys here:

 

New B3/XK-3c keybed

 

I measured the distance that the keys move on my M2, M3 and XK-3c/lower manual and the front of the key drops 3/8" on the M2 and M3 and 1/2" on the XK-3c/LM. At the back of the key the M2 and M3 drops 3/16" and the XK-3c/LM drops 1/8".

 

I took these measurements a couple of weeks ago when the topic of the difference in feel due to the shorter pivot point came up in another forum. I didn't post the results because I decided not to get into the pissing match. I can play my XK-System and M2 at the same time. The M2 output feeds into the effects return of my System. While there is a measurable difference, I cannot feel it while playing. I'm sure there are those whose fingers are attuned to the slightly smaller key travel in the vintage Hammonds and are affected by it. Luckily, I am not.

 

I have only played XK-1's at music stores and to me the keybed feels, plays and sounds just like the Fatar controllers I own.

[mate stubb]

JMcS, your link took me to a downloads page, but I could not find the view you were talking about. I would definitely be interested in seeing that pic.

 

The real Hammond pivot points are quite a way behind the key, almost 4 inches:

 

http://www.hotrodmotm.com/images/hammond/controller_09_01_07_004sm.jpg

[JMcS]

The picture is in the New B3 Brochure. Unfortunately the only way to see it is to open the PDF.

[mate stubb]

Ah, found it. Looks like the New B-3 pivot point is half way between the old style and most newer actions, which pivot right at the back edge of the keys.

[JMcS]

The arc of travel of the vintage B3 keys is slightly flatter than that of the New B3/XK-3 series (Vintage: 3/16 Back, 6/16 Front vs. New: 2/16 Back, 8/16 Front). However it is very similar and, luckily for me, I can't feel it when playing. Actually, I can't feel it when I'm not playing either.

 

The arc of travel on my Studio 610 controller is 0 Back and 9-10/16 Front. That I can feel. IIRC, the keys on the XK-1 have the same arc. The other noticeable thing about the controller is that there is no solid bottom to the key travel. I can't remember if the XK-1 keys bottom out solidly or not.

[Mark Schmieder]

Well, I'm sold. I downloaded the XK-3c manual tonight and compared it page by page with my XK-1 manual. I have a line on an XK-3c, so if I'm able to sell everything that's on the chopping block for a reasonable price, I may be able to swing one after all, in spite of dental expenses today, under the assumption the XK-1 would sell quickly.

 

I do seem to recall preferring the XK-3c action to the XK-1, the one time that Guitar Center had both in stock at once. These days, they have neither. But I still prefer the XK-1 keybed to Nord Electro, as it seems to have a softer landing. Just as Kurzweil tweaks a Fatar action for the PC3x, I suspect Hammond-Suzuki tweaks a stock fatar action for the XK-1.