Hammond Clones "Live" Cutting Thru The Mix...??

[surreal mccoy]

Oh no!!! Not ANOTHER Hammond clone QUESTION ????

 

My apologies ahead....

 

In my pursuit for the absolute best/ greatest/ most authentic Hammond clone available, I realize there's another huge factor to my search.....how well will it cut thru the mix?

 

I've learned hard lessons in the past by purchasing romplers that had great voicings up close.....but just didn't translate the same performing to an audience in a live situation. I remember having a Kurzweil PC2r and loving the piano and EP voices, yet not being able to match my Yamaha S90 cutting thru the mix when in fact, I preferred the Kurz voices.

 

When I was at NAMM last week hanging out at the Hammond booth, I'd periodically bounce back between listening to the great Dr. Lonnie Smith play the B3 and myself auditioning the SK's via headphones. One thing I noticed....that even at a low volume, Dr. Smith's B3 made you "feel" the various highs, mids & lows vs. the Sk's not quite seeming to be able to match the dynamic phrasing values or EQ boundaries of the B3. I further noticed this even more so when I attended the Hammond concert at the Hilton on Friday night. While I was fortunate to see some of the absolute greatest living Hammond players onstage together, there was never any close contest between the actual Hammond B3 onstage vs. the other 3 Sk's.

 

I realize to a certain extent this is back to "apples" vs. "oranges" not necessarily different player's abilities...as when I saw Chester Thompson or Larry Goldings move from the SK to the real B3....the "lights came on"...

 

BTW....this thread is in no way meant for any slam against Hammond as it made me also question my NAMM evaluation of the NE4D. When comparing against the NE Stage 2, I found the newer NE4D slightly more authentic/ defined....however....in a live context...will the NE4D cut thru the mix...?

 

I'd appreciate anyone that may be using a Hammond clone in either a Jazz or Blues trio setting to share their positive/ negative thoughts of what work's best in live performance...as this would be my primary usage...

 

Thanks ahead to this great forum for all the outstanding knowledge & insight being shared...

[CEB]

I don't know about the Nord but all my Hamond clones cut through everything. I reckon if I owned a Nord it would too. My secret is you turn it the eff up on the front end of the signal path and use registrations that punch.

 

IMO too many organ players worry way too much about having registrations that match the original recordings. What you need are registrations that fit the room, hall, stage, band you are playing in. I have to run seperate mixes through dual DIs because I'm a loud frickin organ player. LOL! You don't want to be that. I have problems with leadfoot.

 

If I ever have a problem with balls if it usually the back end amplification and not the clone piece of the equation.

 

The old XB-2 that had tons o' balls. My concern with the Nord would revolve around their reputation of having a weak line out signal. But I don't know jack about Nords.

[Outkaster]

I think a lot of it is the player and knowing how to get the most out of the gear. Look at the video Tuck made in another thread. That CX-3 is often disregarded on this forum but the high C note on that thing just cuts and but clone standards its 12 years old. If your comparing to a real Hammond Console it's no contest most of the time, it's the real thing.

[Tonysounds]

Listen, the clones today kick ass. But you are not imagining there's a difference tween a clone and the real thing, whether evaluating as a player or a listener. I was there, and I heard it in real time. I wish it wasn't true but it is. Whether a result of the 9 contacts, or the amp in the leslie or a combination of many factors, the bottom line is there IS a difference, and you can hear it....and smell it!

[Delaware Dave]

".. I remember having a Kurzweil PC2r and loving the piano and EP voices, yet not being able to match my Yamaha S90 cutting thru the mix when in fact, I preferred the Kurz voices.

Hmmm.. I just did a gig two weeks ago in southern Maryland. After the first set the soundman (who I don't know) made a point to come up and tell me how well the PC3 cut through and how well it sounded. I recognize I have a PC3 and you were talking about a PC2R but I can't imagine that they would sound so drastically different that one would cut through the mix and other wouldn't. We were playing through Mackie equipment; I wonder how much the amplication/speakers, compressors plays into this .....

 

Dr. Smith's B3 made you "feel" the various highs, mids & lows vs. the Sk's not quite seeming to be able to match the dynamic phrasing values..

One of the things I don't like about the KB3 organ is I've always felt it was too compressed as compared to my Voce V5+; so I'm wondering if compression is in play here. When I got the PC3 I felt as though the dynamics were missing on the acoustic piano; I went into the effects section and for the piano I was using I noticed that the effect had compression turned on; I removed the compression on the acoustic piano and the acoustic piano opened up tremendously. Food for thought ...

[Jim Alfredson]

Of course there's a difference and if you hear a clone and the real thing side by side, that difference is in stark relief. But most of us have to compromise due to modern circumstances. So you go with the unit that represents the least amount of compromise possible.

 

The Hammond Suzuki instruments cut just fine. In fact, many times while playing a real B3 at a festival, I wished I had my XK3 because it can cut right through a loud guitarist with no problem. Most real B3's cannot do that unless they are set up properly and the Leslie has new tubes. What works in the studio doesn't necessarily translate to the stage.

 

With all the clones, you have to spend some time tweaking them to get them to sound the way you think they should sound. I'm just now getting my SK2 to sound the way I want. And I have to tweak it for every new room and situation. Of course you can't really do that with a B3, which is why, when I was carrying one around, some nights it would sound great and some nights I couldn't hear my bass at all due to the weird room acoustics. Thankfully with the SK2, I can dial in exactly what I need in each situation.

[JMcS]

Oh no!!! Not ANOTHER Hammond clone QUESTION ????

 

My apologies ahead....

 

 

 

When I was at NAMM last week hanging out at the Hammond booth, I'd periodically bounce back between listening to the great Dr. Lonnie Smith play the B3 and myself auditioning the SK's via headphones. One thing I noticed....that even at a low volume, Dr. Smith's B3 made you "feel" the various highs, mids & lows vs. the Sk's not quite seeming to be able to match the dynamic phrasing values or EQ boundaries of the B3. I further noticed this even more so when I attended the Hammond concert at the Hilton on Friday night. While I was fortunate to see some of the absolute greatest living Hammond players onstage together, there was never any close contest between the actual Hammond B3 onstage vs. the other 3 Sk's.

 

Wouldn't Dr. Smith have been playing a New B3MkII in the booth? The concert would have had a New B3 MkII as well wouldn't it?

[surreal mccoy]

Excellent thoughts/ comments....I appreciate...

 

Yes, my next question might be if in fact you can get "closer" to the real deal via EQ, effects, preamps, speakers, etc. ?

 

I recall using separate EQ and even an aural exciter to boost my Kurz....& btw...I was playing a PC3x for the past couple of years and it seemed to work better "live" vs. the PC2r.

 

I realize that the Neo Vent makes a tremendous difference with some of the older clones that were lacking in the preamp/ leslie area. But what about something like the NE4D that seems pretty solid in those areas. Wouldn't that might make the Vent combined with the NE4D a bit overkill?

[CEB]

Oh no!!! Not ANOTHER Hammond clone QUESTION ????

 

My apologies ahead....

 

 

 

When I was at NAMM last week hanging out at the Hammond booth, I'd periodically bounce back between listening to the great Dr. Lonnie Smith play the B3 and myself auditioning the SK's via headphones. One thing I noticed....that even at a low volume, Dr. Smith's B3 made you "feel" the various highs, mids & lows vs. the Sk's not quite seeming to be able to match the dynamic phrasing values or EQ boundaries of the B3. I further noticed this even more so when I attended the Hammond concert at the Hilton on Friday night. While I was fortunate to see some of the absolute greatest living Hammond players onstage together, there was never any close contest between the actual Hammond B3 onstage vs. the other 3 Sk's.

 

Wouldn't Dr. Smith have been playing a New B3MkII in the booth? The concert would have had a New B3 MkII as well wouldn't it?

 

Yep but he is playing through tube amplification. Tube amps pushed have good punch. Otherwise you better have a lot of headroom.

 

Cutting has more to do with the backend amplification.

[CEB]

Excellent thoughts/ comments....I appreciate...

 

Yes, my next question might be if in fact you can get "closer" to the real deal via EQ, effects, preamps, speakers, etc. ?

 

I recall using separate EQ and even an aural exciter to boost my Kurz....& btw...I was playing a PC3x for the past couple of years and it seemed to work better "live" vs. the PC2r.

 

I realize that the Neo Vent makes a tremendous difference with some of the older clones that were lacking in the preamp/ leslie area. But what about something like the NE4D that seems pretty solid in those areas. Wouldn't that might make the Vent combined with the NE4D a bit overkill?

 

Exciters I am familiar with scoop your tone. IMO you don't want that on organ. A hammond has no business pushing anything over 6K. All it's balls are in lower spectrums.

[Tonysounds]

Excellent thoughts/ comments....I appreciate...

 

Yes, my next question might be if in fact you can get "closer" to the real deal via EQ, effects, preamps, speakers, etc. ?

 

I recall using separate EQ and even an aural exciter to boost my Kurz....& btw...I was playing a PC3x for the past couple of years and it seemed to work better "live" vs. the PC2r.

 

I realize that the Neo Vent makes a tremendous difference with some of the older clones that were lacking in the preamp/ leslie area. But what about something like the NE4D that seems pretty solid in those areas. Wouldn't that might make the Vent combined with the NE4D a bit overkill?

 

Not overkill in terms of results. Is it overkill in terms of the effort/result ratio? That depends on you.

 

For me, its not overkill to bring the Ventilator into the equation. SK1 has a very good sim; the Vent spanks it. Nord 4d has an excellent sim: Vent spanks it. Numa had a great sim: Vent still spanked it.

 

And that spanking was worth the extra effort.especially since my Ventilator is already wired into my rack.  That being said, only the Numa would have made it live without a Ventilator were I to leave the rack at homeId bring the Ventilator for everything else. Now, if I get my hands on a KeyB Solo, that may garner a different answer.

 

The Ventilator imparts a great overdriven sound (not distorted, just a bit of hair on it with some bite at the top that actually smoothes out the high mids and highs). And that helps bring it into the realm of the real, just like a real leslie.

 

[kanker.]

Oh no!!! Not ANOTHER Hammond clone QUESTION ????

 

My apologies ahead....

 

 

 

When I was at NAMM last week hanging out at the Hammond booth, I'd periodically bounce back between listening to the great Dr. Lonnie Smith play the B3 and myself auditioning the SK's via headphones. One thing I noticed....that even at a low volume, Dr. Smith's B3 made you "feel" the various highs, mids & lows vs. the Sk's not quite seeming to be able to match the dynamic phrasing values or EQ boundaries of the B3. I further noticed this even more so when I attended the Hammond concert at the Hilton on Friday night. While I was fortunate to see some of the absolute greatest living Hammond players onstage together, there was never any close contest between the actual Hammond B3 onstage vs. the other 3 Sk's.

 

Wouldn't Dr. Smith have been playing a New B3MkII in the booth? The concert would have had a New B3 MkII as well wouldn't it?

I was thinking the exact same thing.

[Mitch Towne]

There is something to this question, though. My main beef with the Numa was that I could not get it to really punch through no matter what I tried - internal sim, Ventilator, real 147. It just lacked a certain thing in the top octave and got buried by the band. My Nord E3 punched through with no problem.

 

One of the things I love about the Crumar Mojo is the ability to choose different organs for different gigs. The 1956 C3 cuts through the mix of a funk band perfectly but is lacking something when playing LH on a jazz gig. So, on those gigs, I switch to one of the six A100 models or a model of my own B3 that I added.

[JeffLearman]

(sings) "There's nothing like the real thing baby."

 

That said, "cutting" is more a matter of registrations, amplification, and speakers. Even the best Hammond would sound like crap through a crap rig. I got to play with a real Lesile (with XK3c). It was a solid state Leslie, but still having that real spinning horn behind me was sweet.

 

I haven't had a chance to play through a vent yet, and while I bet it's the best when sending to FOH and a number of other cases where a real Leslie has a hard time cutting it, I seriously doubt that any tube sims are quite like the real thing. I play guitar, and I have yet to hear a sim that compares well side-by-side with a real tube guitar amp, even a modest one like my Fender Blues Deluxe. The sims sound glassy in comparison.

 

That said, I use a guitar sim when playing keys and doubling on guitar. With the full band playing, and me playing rhythm, it works.

 

Furthermore, there are a lot of cases where a sim sounds better than the real thing, simply because it's hard to do a good job of miking. Whenever I tried miking my guitar amp at home, all I could hear was the room (which sounds great for vocals or acoustic instruments, but electric guitar, not so much). Despite the superiority of real tubes, I get a far better result using a sim. I'm sure if I spent hours trying different things I'd find something that would work for a particular tone, but then I'd have to try again for different ones, rather than spinning a dial. I might also have to invest in some sound treatments or enclosures.

 

But in any case, the real deal (when it's a great one) has an indescribable and elusive sweetness that no clone quite duplicates. But a lot of "real deals" sound worse -- like pianos, almost half of them are barely worth playing.

 

Clones are for convenience, repeatability, and value. Not as good. But the do "cut through". Try a clone though a real Leslie.

 

CEB is right that you need wazoo headroom. It's even more true for piano than organ, so IMHO if you have the balls for piano, you got organ covered. On the other hand, an organ can take quite a bit of color, but a piano can't.

[The Real MC]

Clones don't sound like a Hammond until you put them through a Leslie or a good Leslie sim.

 

A "good Leslie sim" has to not only simulate the animation, it also has to simulate the frequency response. Leslie cabinets do not have a flat frequency response and they top out around 1xKhz (I forget the exact frequency). The Leslie sim in my XK3 does not emulate the frequency response and it doesn't do the job.

 

I heard a band this past weekend. The keyboardist was using a Kronos and VK7 for his Hammond sounds, and he had an exciter in audio chain. I never liked the VK7 and I could really hear the scooped mids from that exciter.

 

A Leslie sim is often not enough. You need to simulate the room ambience of a Leslie in a room. Many budget digital reverbs do not offer a decent room reverb, I've tried many of them.

 

This is why auditioning through headphones is not enough when seeing how well a clonewheel can cut through.

 

This mp3 of our jazz band from work was recorded in my studio. It's a Jimmy Smith number. This is my XK3/XLK3 through a Dynacord CLS-222, then through a Lexicon model 200 (not MX200) room reverb. The XK3 sound is my own not a factory patch - I exploited the customized tonewheels to match my favorite vintage Hammond. I haven't done an A/B with the Vent vs the CLS-222, but I did A/B the CLS vs my Leslie and you'd have a hard time telling the difference because the CLS emulates both the animation and the frequency response. Mind you, this combination can easily cut through a rock mix.

 

Back At The Chicken Shack

[surreal mccoy]

Clones don't sound like a Hammond until you put them through a Leslie or a good Leslie sim.

 

A "good Leslie sim" has to not only simulate the animation, it also has to simulate the frequency response. Leslie cabinets do not have a flat frequency response and they top out around 1xKhz (I forget the exact frequency). The Leslie sim in my XK3 does not emulate the frequency response and it doesn't do the job.

 

I heard a band this past weekend. The keyboardist was using a Kronos and VK7 for his Hammond sounds, and he had an exciter in audio chain. I never liked the VK7 and I could really hear the scooped mids from that exciter.

 

A Leslie sim is often not enough. You need to simulate the room ambience of a Leslie in a room. Many budget digital reverbs do not offer a decent room reverb, I've tried many of them.

 

This is why auditioning through headphones is not enough when seeing how well a clonewheel can cut through.

 

This mp3 of our jazz band from work was recorded in my studio. It's a Jimmy Smith number. This is my XK3/XLK3 through a Dynacord CLS-222, then through a Lexicon model 200 (not MX200) room reverb. The XK3 sound is my own not a factory patch - I exploited the customized tonewheels to match my favorite vintage Hammond. I haven't done an A/B with the Vent vs the CLS-222, but I did A/B the CLS vs my Leslie and you'd have a hard time telling the difference because the CLS emulates both the animation and the frequency response. Mind you, this combination can easily cut through a rock mix.

 

Back At The Chicken Shack

 

 

While your playing sound's great..you're slightly buried in the mix...the horn player shines thru just fine but the organ sounds a bit as if there's a blanket covering it..sorry...that's what I'm hearing...

[surreal mccoy]

Oh no!!! Not ANOTHER Hammond clone QUESTION ????

 

My apologies ahead....

 

 

 

When I was at NAMM last week hanging out at the Hammond booth, I'd periodically bounce back between listening to the great Dr. Lonnie Smith play the B3 and myself auditioning the SK's via headphones. One thing I noticed....that even at a low volume, Dr. Smith's B3 made you "feel" the various highs, mids & lows vs. the Sk's not quite seeming to be able to match the dynamic phrasing values or EQ boundaries of the B3. I further noticed this even more so when I attended the Hammond concert at the Hilton on Friday night. While I was fortunate to see some of the absolute greatest living Hammond players onstage together, there was never any close contest between the actual Hammond B3 onstage vs. the other 3 Sk's.

 

Wouldn't Dr. Smith have been playing a New B3MkII in the booth? The concert would have had a New B3 MkII as well wouldn't it?

I was thinking the exact same thing.

 

All I know is the B3 or new B3MKII onstage vs. the 3 SK's was like night and day!

[surreal mccoy]

There is something to this question, though. My main beef with the Numa was that I could not get it to really punch through no matter what I tried - internal sim, Ventilator, real 147. It just lacked a certain thing in the top octave and got buried by the band. My Nord E3 punched through with no problem.

 

One of the things I love about the Crumar Mojo is the ability to choose different organs for different gigs. The 1956 C3 cuts through the mix of a funk band perfectly but is lacking something when playing LH on a jazz gig. So, on those gigs, I switch to one of the six A100 models or a model of my own B3 that I added.

 

This isn't the first time I've heard that the best answer might just be the Mojo....I really wish I could sample one prior to ordering....

[Outkaster]

I almost would buy one without trying it based on what I have heard from forum members and YouTube.

[Craig MacDonald]

I almost would buy one without trying it based on what I have heard from forum members and YouTube.

 

That's exactly what I did and I don't regret it.. The Mojo is fantastic..

[Kurt W]

How much different would you say the Mojo is from VB3?

 

When I listen to VB3 through studio monitors it sounds more "spacial" than XK-3c and Nord C2. Same kind of feeling as pressing Sound Virtualizer or Exiter on a CD-player. It may be this 3D soundscape that influence on the ability to cut through?

[B3Nut]

Oh no!!! Not ANOTHER Hammond clone QUESTION ????

 

My apologies ahead....

 

 

 

When I was at NAMM last week hanging out at the Hammond booth, I'd periodically bounce back between listening to the great Dr. Lonnie Smith play the B3 and myself auditioning the SK's via headphones. One thing I noticed....that even at a low volume, Dr. Smith's B3 made you "feel" the various highs, mids & lows vs. the Sk's not quite seeming to be able to match the dynamic phrasing values or EQ boundaries of the B3. I further noticed this even more so when I attended the Hammond concert at the Hilton on Friday night. While I was fortunate to see some of the absolute greatest living Hammond players onstage together, there was never any close contest between the actual Hammond B3 onstage vs. the other 3 Sk's.

 

Wouldn't Dr. Smith have been playing a New B3MkII in the booth? The concert would have had a New B3 MkII as well wouldn't it?

I was thinking the exact same thing.

 

All I know is the B3 or new B3MKII onstage vs. the 3 SK's was like night and day!

 

Were the SK's running direct or through Leslies? The SK's howl through a real spinny. I just got a used XK-1 with an XM-47 Leslie adapter. Cuts through the band through a Leslie no problem, no matter how crazy they get, including the horns.

 

TP

[HammondDave]

I have played B3's and clones on stage hundreds of times... In my opinion, there is no difference in one or the other "cutting through"... It all has to do with the way it's amplified...

 

It is true that if there are more high frequencies present in the sound, then the sound will "cut through" better than a dull sound. But you can EQ that in... Or out...

 

And let's face it... If you really want to cut through, play a Farfisa....

[CEB]

Long live the Farf!

[Tusker]

It all has to do with the way it's amplified...

 

Well said.

[Outkaster]

I almost would buy one without trying it based on what I have heard from forum members and YouTube.

 

That's exactly what I did and I don't regret it.. The Mojo is fantastic..

 

I am still thinking about it. I guess I would have to get used to not having the reverse color presets.

[BigJPatton]

The organ sound is very easily buried in the mix with a full band, there are numerous frequencies being made that jump all over an organ, that's why you need two things- power and more power, it doesn't matter what modern clone you use, they are all very similar and have the same problem, they need a ton of reinforcement, I use a K10 but alone it doesn't cut it, it needs a mixer to drive the amp more, and even then I'm fairly high up on the gain, for those that have trouble I say what amp are you using?

 

Also the obvious need to work the drawbars correctly comes into play, great organ playing in a full band requires a constant fluid change of tone, unless all you do is a few parts here and there.

[mate stubb]

How much different would you say the Mojo is from VB3?

 

When I listen to VB3 through studio monitors it sounds more "spacial" than XK-3c and Nord C2. Same kind of feeling as pressing Sound Virtualizer or Exiter on a CD-player. It may be this 3D soundscape that influence on the ability to cut through?

 

I posted a fairly long answer on that in this recent thread:

https://forums.musicplayer.com/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/2454958

[HammondDave]

The organ sound is very easily buried in the mix with a full band, there are numerous frequencies being made that jump all over an organ, that's why you need two things- power and more power,

 

Which is why I gigged with two ElectroVoice SXA360's for the past three years. I could blow a Marshall stack away with those babies!

[AnotherScott]

There is something to this question, though. My main beef with the Numa was that I could not get it to really punch through no matter what I tried - internal sim, Ventilator, real 147. It just lacked a certain thing in the top octave and got buried by the band.

I was going to ask whether you had tried loading the alternate organ models into the Numa, but I see that you just posted the directions about how to do that, so I guess you did!

 

As mentioned elsewhere, I think it may often make more sense to pay $1250 for an EXP-Edition than $500 for a Vent, to essentially get the sound of the Mojo for the $750 difference. (Also a good way to go if you simply don't have space for a double manual in your rig.) Though the EXP doesn't have the plug-and-play simplicity of a Vent.

 

As for cutting through, there's a simple algorithm. The worse you play, the more people can hear it. ;-)