"I Have Only Come Here Seeking Knowledge..."

[Chad Thorne]

I have a keyboard. I don't call myself a keyboard player (yet!) Here's my question:

 

I have this Radio Shack MD-1800 keyboard, really some flavor of a Casio. I find its Hammond organ, Rhodes and Wurly tones to be acceptable, especially through an amp, along with a assload of synthy sounds I don't really care about too much. What makes this instrument inferior to others costing lots more? Please, no snobby, snide responses, this is not a rhetorical question.

[MoodyBluesKeys]

Some of the Casio instruments have pretty good sounds. It's kind of like the difference between a Squire bass and a MIA Jazz bass - the electronics on the higher end instruments is usually more capable, the sounds that are sampled may have a higher resolution and have been sampled with a more complex process. In keyboards, the physical design is also usually different, most of the low priced keyboards are made using largely plastic components that won't stand up well to the type of abuse that will result from a gigging pro musician's handling (especially touring, where others are handling the gear and shipping it).

 

OTOH, sound quality is relative - as an example, you don't need quite the quality in an organ patch to be playing under three guitars with the amps turned to 11 in a metal band that you need if playing organ in a jazz trio.

 

If you are presently happy with it - no reason at all to change.

 

[resigned]

The same things that make computers and other electronics more or less expensive also apply to keyboards: memory amount, processors, design and features. It's also a matter of what the market will bear - discriminating users will pay more for premium features such as weighted keyboards, larger displays, better quality instrument samples, recording capabilities etc.

[MuzikTeechur]

I think the answer to your question can be found through experience - the experience of playing a real Hammond, or a real Rhodes, etc.

A Hammond isn't just "a sound" - it's an entire library of sounds, infinitely changeable through drawbars, chorale, Leslie, percussion, etc. Ditto with Rhodes sounds. You may have a "hammond-like" sound on your keyboard, or a "Rhodes-like" patch, but when you play with the real thing, you'll know that the actual instruments are much more organic, more gritty, more *real*.

That is the difference.

[CEB]

For me the main things I look at in an instruments are:

 

1) Are the sounds acceptable.

2) The way the action feels when I play it.

3) If it is my main keyboard how easy it is to setup all my performance settings. I want to be able to press a button and have all my MIDI instruments go to their necessary settings. I also want real-time control over all my instruments from the faders and knobs on my main keyboard.

 

Everything is relative to your individual needs.

 

The fancy toys are a lot of fun but for the most part I think gear is overrated. If I had to go back and play some of the gear I made a living on 30 years ago I would get the heebeegeebees. But truth be told I probably sounded better back then than I do now.

[Chad Thorne]

I think the answer to your question can be found through experience - the experience of playing a real Hammond, or a real Rhodes, etc.

A Hammond isn't just "a sound" - it's an entire library of sounds, infinitely changeable through drawbars, chorale, Leslie, percussion, etc. Ditto with Rhodes sounds. You may have a "hammond-like" sound on your keyboard, or a "Rhodes-like" patch, but when you play with the real thing, you'll know that the actual instruments are much more organic, more gritty, more *real*.

That is the difference.

I own an M-3. I have played a Rhodes. In my RS keyboard the Hammond sound IS a "sound." C'mon, man. I didn't say that it was as good as a Hammond, just an acceptable sound to me.

[johnchop]

C'mon, man. I didn't say that it was as good as a Hammond, just an acceptable sound to me.

 

If you know the difference, why did you post?

 

[mate stubb]

Construction of the case and action, professional quality connecting jacks, extra inputs for pedals, amount of money spend obtaining the internal sounds (expensive licensed library or custom expensive sampling sessions) - these all add cost.

 

Also, the market for professional keyboards is a lot smaller than the market for keyboards aimed at the amateur market, so the price goes up accordingly.

 

That being said, Casio is a master at providing a lot of instrument for the money, sounds wise. They still come in cheap plastic cases though.

[Chad Thorne]

I wasn't asking about the differences between a B-3 or a Rhodes and my keyboard. I was asking about the differences between mine and more expensive keyboards.

[Dana.]

Would they not teach you of these things in college?

[Synthoid]

I wasn't asking about the differences between a B-3 or a Rhodes and my keyboard. I was asking about the differences between mine and more expensive keyboards.

 

And several people have explained that to you.

 

 

[AnotherScott]

I wasn't asking about the differences between a B-3 or a Rhodes and my keyboard. I was asking about the differences between mine and more expensive keyboards.

The more expensive keyboards can get closer to the sounds of the real thing. Isn't that what you would expect? The facsimiles you have may be good enough for you, but might not satisfy everyone.

 

(There can also be other differences in terms of more sounds, more real-time controls, better feeling action, more features in terms of splitting/layering multiple sounds at once, etc.)

[Chad Thorne]

Would they not teach you of these things in college?

They would not...

[Chad Thorne]

Construction of the case and action, professional quality connecting jacks, extra inputs for pedals, amount of money spend obtaining the internal sounds (expensive licensed library or custom expensive sampling sessions) - these all add cost.

 

Also, the market for professional keyboards is a lot smaller than the market for keyboards aimed at the amateur market, so the price goes up accordingly.

 

That being said, Casio is a master at providing a lot of instrument for the money, sounds wise. They still come in cheap plastic cases though.

This is probably the closest answer I was looking for. Thanks! And thanks to everyone else who replied, too.

 

I'm going to practice Ab now.

[MuzikTeechur]

I think the answer to your question can be found through experience - the experience of playing a real Hammond, or a real Rhodes, etc.

A Hammond isn't just "a sound" - it's an entire library of sounds, infinitely changeable through drawbars, chorale, Leslie, percussion, etc. Ditto with Rhodes sounds. You may have a "hammond-like" sound on your keyboard, or a "Rhodes-like" patch, but when you play with the real thing, you'll know that the actual instruments are much more organic, more gritty, more *real*.

That is the difference.

I own an M-3. I have played a Rhodes. In my RS keyboard the Hammond sound IS a "sound." C'mon, man. I didn't say that it was as good as a Hammond, just an acceptable sound to me.

 

No, you didn't, but you *did* ask: "What makes this instrument inferior to others costing lots more?" And I answered that question. A better keyboard won't have just "a Hammond sound", it will have the ability to manipulate that sound to evoke a mood, or a "signature" sound. It won't have just "a Rhodes", but a whole range of "signature" Rhodes and Wurlis and EMI's and such. Dr. John to Stevie to Fagan to Billy.

[Phred]

To me the biggest difference is what I feel better playing on. As a casual listener, I am not going to be able to truly appreciate the sound difference between a POS violin, and a crazy-ass expensive one. Same with guitars, basses, etc... A beginner, or someone who isn't a "player (yet!)", probably would find the POS violin, or POS guitar acceptable too...

 

However I certainly think I would notice when a player is inspired by his/her instrument or not.

 

In general (note: I am not picking on any board in particular here, just in the broad sense) I am not inspired by the sounds/actions of entry level boards, and don't feel connected to them. Sometimes it's the simplest thing (the piano decays too quickly, for example), that causes me to struggle to convey what I am trying to.

 

I wasn't asking about the differences between a B-3 or a Rhodes and my keyboard. I was asking about the differences between mine and more expensive keyboards.

 

I beg your pardon, but in a way, you were. If you know the differences between your keyboard, and a real B3 (drawbars, percussion, swell pedal etc...), then you already know that although your keyboard has a B3 sound that is 'acceptable', it is nowhere close to a B3. Well, more expensive keyboards get you MUCH closer to the experience of playing a B3, than most entry level boards. Way past acceptable, and very close to the 'I can't believe it's not butter' category.

 

If you are happy with acceptable, then stay there. I myself am not.

 

[MikeT156]

Please, no snobby, snide responses, this is not a rhetorical question.

 

Chad, I would suggest that you lighten up when you not only ask questions, but when you reply to Posts by members that are trying to answer your question. Sarcastic remarks are usually greeted with sarcastic answers, at least by me.

 

Fortunately for you, most of the other players on this Forum are a lot more tolerant to wise ass questions and comments than I am.

 

 

Mike T.

[Chad Thorne]

I think the answer to your question can be found through experience - the experience of playing a real Hammond, or a real Rhodes, etc.

A Hammond isn't just "a sound" - it's an entire library of sounds, infinitely changeable through drawbars, chorale, Leslie, percussion, etc. Ditto with Rhodes sounds. You may have a "hammond-like" sound on your keyboard, or a "Rhodes-like" patch, but when you play with the real thing, you'll know that the actual instruments are much more organic, more gritty, more *real*.

That is the difference.

I own an M-3. I have played a Rhodes. In my RS keyboard the Hammond sound IS a "sound." C'mon, man. I didn't say that it was as good as a Hammond, just an acceptable sound to me.

 

No, you didn't, but you *did* ask: "What makes this instrument inferior to others costing lots more?" And I answered that question. A better keyboard won't have just "a Hammond sound", it will have the ability to manipulate that sound to evoke a mood, or a "signature" sound. It won't have just "a Rhodes", but a whole range of "signature" Rhodes and Wurlis and EMI's and such. Dr. John to Stevie to Fagan to Billy.

That, I get.

[Chad Thorne]

Please, no snobby, snide responses, this is not a rhetorical question.

 

Chad, I would suggest that you lighten up when you not only ask questions, but when you reply to Posts by members that are trying to answer your question. Sarcastic remarks are usually greeted with sarcastic answers, at least by me.

 

Fortunately for you, most of the other players on this Forum are a lot more tolerant to wise ass questions and comments than I am.

 

 

Mike T.

Follow me on the LD, I'm usually pretty light. But I've been on forums enough to know that occasionally one gets a snotty, superior answer to a question, like, "If you have to ask I'm not going to bother to explain it to you." I didn't get any of those and I appreciate it. But I wanted to preempt them just in case.

[Tusker]

I find its Hammond organ, Rhodes and Wurly tones to be acceptable, especially through an amp, along with a assload of synthy sounds I don't really care about too much.

 

Sometimes an amp will so transform the sound that the sonic details in the original instrument won't matter much. You mentioned an "amp." The amp could be a factor too.

 

Only you can tell if you are happy with a sound. Roland corporation made a cheap bass machine which did a terrible imitation of an electric bass. It was not meant to be a professional performance instrument, but a practice instrument, so guitarists could practice with a bassline. However, its sound became desirable for it's own qualities.

 

http://www.martianarts.net/web/images/stories/ourgear/tb303.jpg

 

This type of storyline has been repeated ad infinitum throughout the history of electronic instruments. If it sounds good, maybe it is good?

[Chad Thorne]

I figure if I don't want to tote my M-3 to gigs - and I don't - "acceptable" has to be good enough. Honestly, in the last few weeks that I've played the RS at jams no one has objected to the "percussive drawbar organ" sound on it, or any of the other flavors of "drawbar" organ it contains, either. So, good enough is good enough.

[jazzdoc52]

99% of folks who listen to you won't know the difference between a Casio, radio shack, or Kronos. They will judge your playing, not the board. I've heard great players make cheap boards sound great, and vice versa. My advice is get what you can afford, and enjoy it. Life is short.

[Chad Thorne]

99% of folks who listen to you won't know the difference between a Casio, radio shack, or Kronos. They will judge your playing, not the board. I've heard great players make cheap boards sound great, and vice versa. My advice is get what you can afford, and enjoy it. Life is short.

This is what I think, too. We used to have a keys player who played a keyboard he bought for 10 bucks at a yard sale. Nobody seemed to notice...

[I-missRichardTee]

I am a full time musician. I own or have owned all or most of the instruments in discussion.

RIght now i own a yamaha psr900 it is not considered pro level, but consumer level.

I played it with a band and the guitarist astutely observed the flaw in the sound of it. HE called it something like a saw tooth, ( not sure what he said precisely ) like the sound wave was not entirely true.

I heard another pro who also owned the consumer level psr 900, he played it through a massive PA.. maybe through 8 speakers. It sounded great to me.

SO application is a factor- WHERE is your keyboard being used? Through a PA or not? Just for Home, for recording etc.

I play the Yamaha through a smaller PA and I have mixed feelings about it.

The action is horrible if one is used to weighted action when playinf pianos.

I cannot easily express pianistic ideas on it... I make do ( due??) when I use it.

I hope this gives perspective

[I-missRichardTee]

99% of folks who listen to you won't know the difference between a Casio, radio shack, or Kronos. They will judge your playing, not the board. I've heard great players make cheap boards sound great, and vice versa. My advice is get what you can afford, and enjoy it. Life is short.

This is what I think, too. We used to have a keys player who played a keyboard he bought for 10 bucks at a yard sale. Nobody seemed to notice...

 

You said you were not a full time player. The fallacy here is YOU will notice it, not the audience. If YOU notice it, it will have a less than postive effect ( affect?) on your performance... and the AUDIENCE WILL notice THAT... the performance.

Make sense?

[kanker.]

If you find a Radio Shack organ sound "acceptable", then I'd hate to hear what your M-3 sounds like

[allan_evett]

99% of folks who listen to you won't know the difference between a Casio, radio shack, or Kronos. They will judge your playing, not the board. I've heard great players make cheap boards sound great, and vice versa. My advice is get what you can afford, and enjoy it. Life is short.

This is what I think, too. We used to have a keys player who played a keyboard he bought for 10 bucks at a yard sale. Nobody seemed to notice...

 

You said you were not a full time player. The fallacy here is YOU will notice it, not the audience. If YOU notice it, it will have a less than postive effect ( affect?) on your performance... and the AUDIENCE WILL notice THAT... the performance.

Make sense?

 

mRT: Makes sense, most of the time. But those times when I can't hear myself anyway, and the audience doesn't give a rat's ass who is playing and what they're

playing (i.e. - the hip-hop crowd that fell down the rabbit hole and landed in a country bar), then a $10 garage sale keyboard is more than enough firepower; or, better yet, a Meowsic. At times like that I wish I could just stay home, and send a cardboard cutout of myself instead

[Jason Stanfield]

I wasn't asking about the differences between a B-3 or a Rhodes and my keyboard. I was asking about the differences between mine and more expensive keyboards.

Aside from the sample quality -- high-end 'boards have larger samples that leave in a lot of the nuances that get lost in portable 'boards like yours -- the option to edit the sounds is present.

 

You might have a good tremolo'd Rhodes sound, but you may not be able to adjust the speed or character of the tremolo, etc. Also, more expensive 'boards might let you, say, alter the character of the Rhodes itself. If you find a sound you like, but it's too dull, you might be able to use the modeling tech to change the virtual tines, pickups, etc.

 

Other features like higher-quality & customizable effects, the ability to split (ex: left-hand bass, right hand piano) or layer (piano & strings together), swap out sample sets, the 'board's action, and many other factors set "pro" instruments apart from portable keyboards.

 

A good way to look at it is this: a Fender Squier through a 40w combo amp with digital effects might be an acceptable guitar sound to an audience, but a PRS through a tube amp and boutique analog pedals sounds much richer and more nuanced, and you can customize the sound dramatically. Ditto with portable vs. "pro" 'boards.

 

The musician's preferences -- and that's any musician: keyboardist, guitarist, singer, drummer, bassist, etc. -- always exceed the audience's expectations so vanity plays a large role in gear selection. If you're happy with what you have, enjoy it and don't let our snooty preferences influence you -- your band, your gear, your prerogative.