Crumar Mojo Review - Gig Tested

[AnotherScott]

While the dynamic range would be the same for any pedal, a pedal with 5" of travel will be easier to make subtle changes with than one with 3" of travel.

Right, so then again, the issue isn't the amount of dynamic range. It is, as you say, how controllable it is... but also the "curve" of response-- i.e. in this case, whether the pedals match the pedal-position-verus-percentage-of-max-volume curve of a real tonewheel Hammond.

 

I don't know how the other products work but the Hammond XK's and SK's have adjustable range amounts...There are several expression curves that can be selected that determine how much the values change at various points in the pedal's travel.

So it sounds like the XK and SK should (or at least have the potential to) work well with any pedal (of decent travel), since you can "dial in" different curves. Does anyone know if the Mojo has the same capability? Though even then, a pedal which is simply designed to be "right" out of the box could be better than one in which you have to experiment with different settings, and perhaps never find something quite as good as you'd get using the pedal they designed it for.

[mate stubb]

Mojo doesn't have all the expression pedal scaling customization of the XK series - that would make a nice addition.

 

I plan on trying my FC-7 in place of the long throw pedal when I get a chance.

 

One thing that can throw a pedal's response curve off is the total resistance of the pot. Intuitively, that doesn't make sense because the pot SHOULD just be acting as a voltage divider. Practically though, I have definitely seen it make a difference.

[AnotherScott]

I plan on trying my FC-7 in place of the long throw pedal when I get a chance.

I'd be very curious to hear how that turns out. I have a couple of FC-7 pedals, and am thinking about buying a Crumar, and it would be good to know if there were really an advantage to ordering their pedal compared to what I've got.

[Mitch Towne]

I have the Yamaha FC-7 and it works just fine. I think Guido told me it would work the same.

[JMcS]

Some pedals either get to 127 too soon and have a lot of motion remaining where nothing happens or they cannot get the MIDI value to reach 127. The Hammond instruments have a parameter that compensates for this. Any pedal should be able to be made to work well with them.

[Jim Alfredson]

Mojo doesn't have all the expression pedal scaling customization of the XK series - that would make a nice addition.

 

Right. That was one thing I didn't like about using VB3 live. I couldn't get the pedal (in my case a Yamaha FC7) to respond the way I wanted. The pedal parameters on the XK3/c are extremely customizable. I have mine set so that I can go from barely a whisper to taking someone's head off.

[Josh Paxton]

Check the post FKS made in this thread on 3 March about it (2:49 PM my time, 8 or 9:49 PM your time, I guess). He dug it, a lot.

 

So much, in fact, that it apparently addled my brain and caused me to call the FC7 an "FC10." No idea where I pulled that from.

 

Trying the FC7 with the Mojo was on this list of "things I'd hoped to get to, but didn't."

[Jim Alfredson]

You are right on! The C/V of XK-3 (XK-3c) is based on the 70s Hammond C3 because that's what HS Japan owns. The C/V of SK1/2 is based on the mid 60s A100 as far as I know. Yes, it doesn't really matter whether the C/V is good or bad to the audience, but if you can play comfortably, that matters. You know what I'm talking about.

 

Finally, someone confirms what I've heard with my own ears! Yes, the C/V of the XK3/c sounds like my 1974 B3. I've been saying (typing) that for awhile on this forum! People claim it isn't authentic... but it IS authentic to a late 60s / early 70s B3.

 

See, folks? I'm not crazy! Can I get the label of "Hammond/Suzuki whore" removed now?

[Mitch Towne]

I never doubted you, Jim. But that doesn't mean I like the XK3 chorus today any more than I did yesterday!

[mate stubb]

B3-er, I have a lot more experience with pre-60s consoles than 70s - do the 70s ones have the gentler depth of the pre-60s ones (at least compared to the throbbing A-100s?)

[Gary75]

B3boy,

 

How did you find the Exp Pedal on your Keyb Duo?

 

Thanks.

 

Build quality wise, it was an all plastic affair, certainly no XK3 quality expression pedal. As far as throw is concerned it was pretty good actually.

 

A friend of mine had the KeyB pedalboard with the pedal built into it, felt nicer, firmer, with a Leslie kick switch on the side.

 

As a side note guys, I'm getting my Hamichord tomorrow or Wednesday. The EXP module I'm ordering in a week. So if there's anything you guys want to know either sonically or hardware please let me know and I'll be glad to help. I even found the weight of a British Pound Coin (9.5grams) to do a weight test! I can run it I to a 145 cab with a 122 amp through Speakeasy Pre interface if you like.

[Jim Alfredson]

It's all based on the age. My 1959 A100 c/v sounds like my 1958 B3 c/v. It's the classic gentle c/v that we hear on Jimmy Smith recordings from the early 60s.

 

I've owned later A100s that were more throbbing for sure. The '74 B3 is pretty pronounced. Like the XK3. It's the same, really. The nice thing about the XK3c is that you can adjust the depth. But it still never really sounds like a mellow late 50's c/v. And that's okay with me. I like how the c/v on my XK3 really adds presence and differentiates the tone in a way that's obvious even with a slammin' drummer and raging blues guitarist doing their thang.

 

I haven't spent any time with the SK series since before they were released way back last April. But even only with the hour I had at the time, I recognized that the c/v sounded different than the XK series. If they based it on a mid-60s A100, that's a smart idea.

 

[Jim Alfredson]

I should mention that with Todd's help (b3nut) I changed the c/v on my 1954 C2 to be more pronounced. Those earlier models (B2, C2) had extremely gentle c/v effects, so much so that it's barely noticeable when they are on.

 

So again...as I've stated many times... there is no ONE authentic Hammond c/v. They changed it many times throughout the history of the company. It really depends on what your personal ideal is.

[Josh Paxton]

So again...as I've stated many times... there is no ONE authentic Hammond c/v. They changed it many times throughout the history of the company. It really depends on what your personal ideal is.

 

Whore.

 

[AnotherScott]

I have the Yamaha FC-7 and it works just fine. I think Guido told me it would work the same.

 

That was one thing I didn't like about using VB3 live. I couldn't get the pedal (in my case a Yamaha FC7) to respond the way I wanted.

 

Interesting pair of quotes. There are really two different issues: Does the expression pedal control of VB3 behave authentically (i.e. the way it does on a real tonewheel Hammond)--which may or may not be B3-er's idea of optimum operation--and if so, now that we know that the pedal curve parameters in the Mojo are not tweakable, does it behave more authentically with Crumar's own pedal than with an FC7, or is it the same. I'd be very curious to hear from anyone with a Mojo (or Hamichord) who could compare expression with Crumar's pedal vs. Yamaha's (or Roland's for that matter).

[Jim Alfredson]

In my opinion, the pedal works authentically in VB3. But... remember, the B3 has a soft/normal volume tab over on the left hand side that allows one to increase the dynamic range of the instrument. I have my EXP-100f on the XK3 set-up to mimic that range, but from just the pedal, like the old Hammond BC.

[AnotherScott]

In my opinion, the pedal works authentically in VB3. But... remember, the B3 has a soft/normal volume tab over on the left hand side that allows one to increase the dynamic range of the instrument. I have my EXP-100f on the XK3 set-up to mimic that range, but from just the pedal, like the old Hammond BC.

Ah, interesting! So you've taken advantage of the XK3's custom tweakability to come up with a pedal curve that is actually less authentic to a tonewheel Hammond, but better suited to your purposes. I could see then why the lack of that level of tweakability on VB3 would be a limitation for you.

 

The tonewheel Hammonds I've played have been older (pre-3) models, I don't think any had a soft/normal tab for overall level. I guess that's why I wouldn't miss it. ;-)

[Jim Alfredson]

No, my curve is authentic... to the Hammond BC and BCV consoles, which did not have the soft/normal tab but instead a larger dynamic range via the expression pedal.

 

They introduced the soft/normal tab on the B2 / C2 models.

 

In fact, that's another cool thing about the XK3/c. You can get them to mimic older consoles, albeit without the c/v. The c/v on the BCV was a trip. Totally different than the later models. But you can move the foldback points so that the 1st drawbar goes all the way down to the lowest C without repeating, just like a BC/BCV/CV. It's really cool!

[AnotherScott]

No, my curve is authentic... to the Hammond BC and BCV consoles, which did not have the soft/normal tab but instead a larger dynamic range via the expression pedal.

 

They introduced the soft/normal tab on the B2 / C2 models.

 

In fact, that's another cool thing about the XK3/c. You can get them to mimic older consoles, albeit without the c/v. The c/v on the BCV was a trip. Totally different than the later models. But you can move the foldback points so that the 1st drawbar goes all the way down to the lowest C without repeating, just like a BC/BCV/CV. It's really cool!

Ah, then I might like your tweak better myself! The "real" Hammond I played most was an original C, it was also the best sounding Hammond I ever played. No C/V at all, as I recall, and I have no recollection of its foldback implementation. But its volume pedal expression seemed natural to me, very smooth fades in and out. I don't "ride" a pedal like some players do (maybe because I'm a rock player), but I do like smooth gradations when needed.

[mate stubb]

Tried a FC-7 on my Mojo tonight. It worked just fine.

 

It is slightly longer throw than the "long throw" pedal that came with Mojo. It also sits closer to the floor on a shorter base. As near as I can tell, the response is at least as good or slightly better too.

 

 

[Joe Muscara]

Guido posted this on FB

 

 

You can now import one custom generator from a text file...

 

so go buy a digital oscilloscope and measure your Hammond's generator!

[mate stubb]

I guess the cat's out of the bag then. More goodies coming too!

[HammondDave]

No, my curve is authentic... to the Hammond BC and BCV consoles, which did not have the soft/normal tab but instead a larger dynamic range via the expression pedal.

 

They introduced the soft/normal tab on the B2 / C2 models.

 

In fact, that's another cool thing about the XK3/c. You can get them to mimic older consoles, albeit without the c/v. The c/v on the BCV was a trip. Totally different than the later models. But you can move the foldback points so that the 1st drawbar goes all the way down to the lowest C without repeating, just like a BC/BCV/CV. It's really cool!

 

The CV on my 1955 B3 is very subtle... Whereas the CV on my 1959 B3 is about as strong as any A100 I have ever heard,... Go figure...

[dazzjazz]

Forgive my ignorance, but what's the difference between leakage and crosstalk?

 

Darren

[mate stubb]

leakage is just that - background noise that is present at all times - if you have ever sat in front of a vintage B-3 and leslie cranked you can usually hear a kind of "noise hash", sometimes with a bit of hum thrown in.

 

That's leakage.

 

Crosstalk is modulation of one tonewheel tone by another - kind of like oscillator FM in analogue synthesizers. These are usually related by frequency as generator construction has 4 tonewheels sharing the same physical bin.

 

Addendum: other secondary sources of crosstalk include the wiring harnesses and the generator terminal strip.

[dazzjazz]

thanks - now I labels for the sounds my A100 makes.

[Joe Muscara]

I wonder how much work it is to measure a Hammond generator to create a file for VB3. I think it's very cool we can have this. I remember one of the clones Joey D endorsed had something similar, where they would measure your Hammond for you and input those parameters into your clone. I don't know if they ever actually starting doing this for customers besides Joey D.

[AnotherScott]

I wonder how much work it is to measure a Hammond generator to create a file for VB3. I think it's very cool we can have this.

I would love to see some step-by-step about how to do something like this. I wouldn't even know where to get the signal from, much less what to measure and how to enter the values.

 

I also am curious about that screen shot... Is that what it looks like when you connect a monitor to a Mojo? Or is there some clue there that perhaps a VB3 2.0 for computer plug-in use may finally be getting close to release?

 

And what is that facebook page, anyway? It didn't come up in a quick facebook search for Crumar, Mojo, or VB3, and I didn't see a facebook link from their web site.

[Joe Muscara]

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000390275189

 

Also, VB2 2.03 is out according to this page.

[mate stubb]

You should be able to measure your Hammond with either an oscilloscope or a good multimeter.

 

You will want to measure peak to peak AC voltages on the long terminal strip at the back of the tone generator where all the wiring harnesses attach.

 

The main hassle is that the tones are not in pitch order.

 

Scott: yes, that is the UI you get when you plug a monitor into Mojo.