Numa 2 update

[LX88]

The fact that they knocked 700 dollars off of the price and possibly IMPROVED this almost makes me mad.

 

But I am still happy with Numa 1. The fact that I was able to get the Key B engine in a 22 lb. package has been a pleasure. I have had a lot of fun with it.

 

Stephen Fortner says the sound of the 2 is an improvement. That would be nice. The price certainly is.

[Josh Paxton]

A bit of info I can't find in the reviews: are the reverse-color preset keys playable? I know you can split the board and transpose the lower part an octave up. But when you do that, can you play the reverse keys to get the full bass range?

[AnotherScott]

The fact that they knocked 700 dollars off of the price and possibly IMPROVED this almost makes me mad.

Better never buy a computer, then. ;-) At least, supposedly, you may be able to load the improvements into the older model, though.

 

A bit of info I can't find in the reviews: are the reverse-color preset keys playable? I know you can split the board and transpose the lower part an octave up. But when you do that, can you play the reverse keys to get the full bass range?

The reverse-color preset keys are playable when you are using the board to drive an external sound (on an attached laptop, iPad, sound module). It is not possible to use those keys while also using the Numa's internal organ engine. As discussed earlier, at least on the original Numa organ, it won't even work if you loop the MIDI Out back into the In. "Local Off" mode is more than just what it sounds like... it completely disables the organ engine, from both internal and external control. For me, the inability to use the bottom octave of keys when also playing organ is the biggest design flaw. While the organ sound is enabled, it *does* let you disable the use of those keys as presets, if you don't want to worry about triggering presets accidentally... but at that point, the keys have no function... they can't be used to give the lower half of an organ split more breathing room, they can't be used for playing an external sound on the left while playing the internal organ sound on the right. If only they implemented a true Local Off that permitted the organ engine to continue to respond to MIDI input, the extra keys would be a lot more useful. If by any chance this has been addressed in the 2, I'd love to hear about it...

[BigJPatton]

The lower price shouldn't bother any old Numa owners, it's been years, when the original was released the market was very different than today, the old Numa was heads and shoulders better then the rest for sound, layout and weight, that's not the case anymore, they had to make the new model irresistible to those that are looking for a clone but question the Numa reliability.

[Josh Paxton]

The reverse-color preset keys are playable when you are using the board to drive an external sound (on an attached laptop, iPad, sound module). It is not possible to use those keys while also using the Numa's internal organ engine.

 

Damn, that's disappointing. It was looking tempting, but that's a deal breaker for me.

[Mitch Towne]

So, would that be a deal breaker for you if you got a real Hammond, because those only have 61 playable keys per manual also?

[Josh Paxton]

So, would that be a deal breaker for you if you got a real Hammond, because those only have 61 playable keys per manual also?

 

Of course. Because clearly I judge a vintage tonewheel organ and a modern, digital, single-manual clone by exactly the same standards, and have identical requirements in mind for both.

[Mitch Towne]

So, would that be a deal breaker for you if you got a real Hammond, because those only have 61 playable keys per manual also?

 

Of course. Because clearly I judge a vintage tonewheel organ and a modern, digital, single-manual clone by exactly the same standards, and have identical requirements in mind for both.

 

Ha! Great reply!

[LX88]

If Studiologic would only make a lower manual for the Numa 2....

 

I like the idea of having the option of using either single or dual manuals. For a lot of what I do ( including practicing) a single manual works just fine. But there are times I would like to have both manuals.

 

Maybe if I ( and of course a few others) bug the Italians from Studiologic at NAMM they will consider manufacturing the second manual. After a fair amont of pestering ( mostly from me I suppose) they did modify the Numa 1 so that it would have control over percussion volume. By the way, I would be curious to know if the Numa 2 does this.

 

The good thing is that Studiologic has been persistant in developing the Numa concept, even though I do know that there wee rocky times during the first year of its existence.

 

Meanwhile, it's looking like Key B is still not getting off the ground with any kind of real presence in the North American market. That's too bad because Elvio Previati really has provided a nice concept. To me , he was the first person to really provide a serious alternative to lugging a tonewheel Hammond.

 

So kudos to Elvio, and I am glad that his sounds are reaching a lot more ears via the Numa.

[tommybuoy]

My Numa 2 just arrived. My first impressions are mixed - I'm not sure I'm gonna keep this thing. I think their MIDI implementation is lacking - and English appears to be a second language for whoever wrote the Midi sections of the manual.

 

(1) it makes no sense to me that the volume control on the far right should have an effect on the MIDI OUT signal (when the Numa 2 is acting as a midi controller for a patch in another machine). Yet it does. The volume control should apply ONLY to the internal sounds on the Numa 2, IMO. To me, this really looks like a bug. I mean think about it - you set up a Combi in the other machine with the mix you'd like. So why in the world should the midi controller be allowed to alter that mix? The way it's implemented, I need to set the Numa 2 volume @ 100% to get the mix I want -- which certainly will cause grief when I need to switch back to an internal sound (I'll likely blow eardrums if I forget to reduce volume before doing the switch back to the internal sound). UGH!

 

(2) How to set polarity for a HOLD pedal? Mine is backwards.

 

(3) How to customize MIDI transmit channel(s)? Is this thing truly hard coded to channels 1 & 2?

 

I'm thinking there must be a Windows/Mac program out there to allow for customization of these things. Not finding any such program. HELP!

 

ALSO:

 

(4) while altering volume via a hammond expression pedal, a bunch of non-volume-related settings were altered on the Numa 2. Definitely a problem, but I haven't been able to reproduce it. How embarrassing THAT would be in a gig!

 

 

[HammondDave]

My Numa 2 just arrived. My first impressions are mixed - I'm not sure I'm gonna keep this thing. I think their MIDI implementation is lacking - and English appears to be a second language for whoever wrote the Midi sections of the manual.

 

(1) it makes no sense to me that the volume control on the far right should have an effect on the MIDI OUT signal (when the Numa 2 is acting as a midi controller for a patch in another machine). Yet it does. The volume control should apply ONLY to the internal sounds on the Numa 2, IMO. To me, this really looks like a bug. I mean think about it - you set up a Combi in the other machine with the mix you'd like. So why in the world should the midi controller be allowed to alter that mix? The way it's implemented, I need to set the Numa 2 volume @ 100% to get the mix I want -- which certainly will cause grief when I need to switch back to an internal sound (I'll likely blow eardrums if I forget to reduce volume before doing the switch back to the internal sound). UGH!

 

(2) How to set polarity for a HOLD pedal? Mine is backwards.

 

(3) How to customize MIDI transmit channel(s)? Is this thing truly hard coded to channels 1 & 2?

 

I'm thinking there must be a Windows/Mac program out there to allow for customization of these things. Not finding any such program. HELP!

 

ALSO:

 

(4) while altering volume via a hammond expression pedal, a bunch of non-volume-related settings were altered on the Numa 2. Definitely a problem, but I haven't been able to reproduce it. How embarrassing THAT would be in a gig!

 

 

Who cares about all that anyway? Tell us... is Joey D's name still on it?

[JohnDoe]

No, Joey D´s name and KeyB engine is not mentioned/ printed on the Numa 2.

I have the Numa 1 and I bought the Numa 2 but sent it back. To my ears Numa 2 had a less organic, more syntetic sound than the 1, OD was more fizzy, leakage had to much bass frequency in it and the lesliesimulation was not to my taste.

The keybed feel was super and the casing was rocksolid but my Numa 1 is still a very, very close clone to my old C3/147 combo!

[humb]

how you mean lees organic and more syntetic sound ??

 

by demos i hear it sound same just have expanded sound library vs numa 1 ??

 

can you give more info/sound ??

 

[Doerfler]

My Numa 2 just arrived. HELP!

 

Tommybuoy -

 

contact Ken Hall in Canada. He can be found on the "Clonewheel" group over at Yahoo. He is loving his Numa 2, and he is quite the accomplished player. AFAIK, no one understands the ins and outs of the Numa like him. If you can't find him, send me a PM and I'll send you his e-mail addy.

[Aidan]

Maybe it was just his choice of registrations, but in the Martirano demos, the Numa sounds shrill and lacks warmth for my ears at least.

[tommybuoy]

Thanks DaveD - but StudioLogic support just got back to me and there's no way to do the midi customizations I want. Plus I just A/B'd the NUMA2 against Hammond XK1C and there's really no comparison, sound-wise, IMO. Hammond is a much better sounding instrument. And their midi does what I want. So Numa2 is headin back to Kraft Music.

 

[AnotherScott]

Thanks DaveD - but StudioLogic support just got back to me and there's no way to do the midi customizations I want. Plus I just A/B'd the NUMA2 against Hammond XK1C and there's really no comparison, sound-wise, IMO. Hammond is a much better sounding instrument.

Interesting. Are you more of a rock player or a jazz player?

 

My own big issues with the Numa (original) is that the lower octave of keys are not playable on an organ split or when the board is in combined organ+MIDI mode, and that the organ engine does not respond to MIDI input when the board is in Local Off (MIDI controller) mode. I also wish the rotary LED would blink slow or fast to indicate the speed (which you can't tell from the position of the wheel if you're using a footswitch). Still, it's been my clonewheel of choice. The interface/ergonomics and sound all work really well for me. It also has one of the better overdrive functions (which I guess gets back to my question about your being a jazz vs rock player). And for controller use of an organ keyboard, I like the C-to-C layout, which is better on both top and bottom than the SK1-73'S F-to-F. But that's not an issue if you only care about 61 anyway.

 

I'll be eager to also see if other people feel that the 2 doesn't sound as good as the original... especially since the original is supposed to be upgradeable to the 2 software (and I haven't seen anything about it being reversible).

[Dglavko]

Interesting too that I bought an SK1 from Ken awhile back, then bought a Numa1 from him a few months later, and then sold the SK1 shortly afterwards (and still have the Numa1 and Mojo)... Also have an opportunity to buy the same SK1 again (!!!) but, while there are things about the SK1 I quite liked, I prefer the Numa1 with a Sonic Cell...

[Ashville.Guru]

it makes no sense to me that the volume control on the far right should have an effect on the MIDI OUT signal (when the Numa 2 is acting as a midi controller for a patch in another machine). Yet it does. The volume control should apply ONLY to the internal sounds on the Numa 2, IMO. To me, this really looks like a bug.

Certainly not a bug, and the Numa implementation actually makes a lot of sense. To understand it, you need to look beyond the Numa, and at how MIDI works.

 

Face it, every MIDI signal sent from a controller can potentially have unintended consequences. The solution is not to silence the MIDI signal at the source - that would mean preventing every knob, button, fader, aftertouch, expression pedal, pitchbend, ribbon from sending MIDI. Effectively denying control options to musicians - with no scope for workarounds.

 

The sensible way of preventing unintended consequences is through MIDI filters. High-end sound engines like the Kronos have built-in filters, if I'm not mistaken. Or you could always use a tiny MIDI solutions box to filter out CC7, which is what the volume knob would be transmitting.

 

And if you're controlling software, there are just so many ways of filtering out unwanted CC.

 

As @AnotherScott points out elsewhere, the Numa 2 is perhaps the best controller out there right now - for a VB3 rig. And that's precisely because all the hardware controls transmit MIDI!

 

- Guru

 

 

[AnotherScott]

English appears to be a second language for whoever wrote the Midi sections of the manual.

No doubt. Of course, the same has (unfortunately) been true for many manuals from, well, most other brands. (Including Hammond.)

 

it makes no sense to me that the volume control on the far right should have an effect on the MIDI OUT signal (when the Numa 2 is acting as a midi controller for a patch in another machine). Yet it does. The volume control should apply ONLY to the internal sounds on the Numa 2, IMO. To me, this really looks like a bug. I mean think about it - you set up a Combi in the other machine with the mix you'd like. So why in the world should the midi controller be allowed to alter that mix? The way it's implemented, I need to set the Numa 2 volume @ 100% to get the mix I want -- which certainly will cause grief when I need to switch back to an internal sound (I'll likely blow eardrums if I forget to reduce volume before doing the switch back to the internal sound). UGH!

In addition to what Guru said about filtering unwanted CC on the receiving end, why do you need to move this knob all the time? For the internal sound, you should be able to set it where you want once, and leave it there (using the expression pedal to reduce the organ volume from that max level when needed). And you say you don't want it to control an external sound... which it won't do (AFAIK) unless you move it. Especially since you don't *want* it to alter your external sound, why are you moving it when you are triggering an external sound? I'm missing something here. Is the Numa sending a MIDI Volume command to your external sound merely by turning on the Numa's MIDI controller mode, without even turning that knob?

 

How to set polarity for a HOLD pedal? Mine is backwards.

Not all boards have this adjustment... I don't think any Yamaha or Roland boards do, for example... you simply have to use the correct pedal for their boards, which is basically opposite of everyone else's. You probably have a Yamaha or Roland pedal. Pedals from anyone else should work. You can get pedals that have a switch that will work on either kind of board.

 

 

[mobi]

As @AnotherScott points out elsewhere, the Numa 2 is perhaps the best controller out there right now - for a VB3 rig. And that's precisely because all the hardware controls transmit MIDI!

 

That's a very valid point IMHO, being looking around for an organ controller,not many options that sends midi in all parameters and has a more or less standard organ layout, besides not costing and arm and a leg , an last but not least , that's not heavy as hell, like the new DMC-122 or Keyb Master controller.

[Ashville.Guru]

There's an unmistakable trend in today's mid-range boards - great sounds, poor action, poor MIDI implementation. The Numa 2 bucks the trend, and is a refreshing step in the opposite direction - good action, good build quality, good ergonomics and control, and good MIDI implementation.

 

Perhaps the best way to look at it is as a great controller with arguably good built-in sound. Which is a rare thing on the market, these days.

 

- Guru

[tommybuoy]

to all defending this machine... (i suspect you all work for the company?)

 

I do take your point about the volume knob sending the midi signal down and mucking up my mixes on remote machines. I should have filtered out (on the remote machine) whatever signal that is. Yes your point is taken on that one.

 

I'm still freakin out about the organ changing sheeitload of internal parameters when i was just upping the volume with the expression pedal. I had the machine for like 4 hours and hit this. You saying none of you ever hit this problem?

 

Whatever - studiologic loses because you basically look at yourself as just an organ, where I had been using a top keyboard (call it an organ) that had really really good Midi capabilities. (Yep - just a hammond XK1C. You can actually configure that thing to do what you want!)

 

After dicking around with your machine for a full day - I realized I was not gonna get what i needed in time for next gig. So - I plugged my XK1C back into my rig and it was then obvious to me - not only does XK1C do what's expected, it also sounds a hell of a lot better than the Numa2.

 

As other folks have posted - your overdrive absolutely blows and your leslie sim is not right. And your typical key click is just obnoxious.

 

And of course - you give no fricking midi customization tool. DO YOU KNOW HOW EASY IT WOULD BE TO PLUG AN APP INTO THE USB AND LET US CHANGE THINGS LIKE MIDI CHANNELS AND SUSTAIN PEDAL POLARITIES?

 

You guys really don't get it. HAMMOND WINS HANDS DOWN. I would suggest to anyone thinking about Numa 2 vs XK1-C: REALLY listen closely and then look @ midi and other-customization capabilities. And I think now there's less than a $200 price difference? DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE ON THIS CHOICE, MY KEYBOARD PLAYER FRIENDS!

[LX88]

So OK...

 

This is the first that I have heard that the Numa 2 does not claim to use the Key B engine. Or, at least that it is not stated on the body of the instrument like it was on the Numa 1.

 

And now there are a few reports from some that it sounds less organic etc. etc.

 

So I am wondering if Studiologic has done its own modeling of a tonewheel Hammond and may not be using the Key B sound source.

 

If they are no longer using Key B that's too bad. There are some people who would be able to hear a difference.

 

In a week or so I will probably be able to hear it at NAMM and if it sounds different or not as good I will probably have something to say about that.

 

It would be a shame if there has been a radical change. But I always thought that getting a single manual with the Key B engine was pretty cool.

 

As far as comparing something like the Hammond SK1 to the Numa 1.... I was never wild about the stock chorus vibrato on any of the Hammond clones ( with the exception of the $20, 000 " new" B-3). The reason I liked the Numa 1 so much was because of the C/V, and also the leslie sim.

 

As far as certain people wanting to claim that the Hammond clone C/V was the real deal.... I never got that impression.

 

The Key B/ Numa gave me what I wanted to hear, as far as providing useful C/V and leslie simulation.

 

[mak1457]

LX, you should try the mix feature that HS has recently added. It really helps give the C/V depth. My XK-1c sounds far better than the XK3-c I played a few years ago.

 

And Tommybuoy, don't go dissing other people just because they don't agree with you on your keyboard choices. We all care passionately about our music and we all use what sounds best to us.

[tommybuoy]

mak1457 - I'm dissing only the engineers that short changed config options - AND - the a-holes that reviewed this thing on the web. I had no access to this thing before I bought it - so now i have to pay to return it. If anyone had done a decent review ONLINE, perhaps I would have saved those shipping costs.

 

Call this my online review.

[LX88]

I will check out the XK-1c at NAMM and see if I can figure out how to get into the "mix" feature.

 

I am not trying to diss the Hammond Suzuki fans. I know that when people buy a certain piece of gear that they generally do have faith that it will deliver the goods they need.

 

The reason the Numa 1 works for me, and I have said this many many times... is that when I have to play in mono, I have to have chorus vibrato that behaves somewhat like a tonewheel organ.

 

When I have that , I generally don't mess with any leslie sim. I just go for that C/V sound, just like a lot of classic older recordings. It's a sound I can live with.

 

So I will definitely be interested to see if the mix feature has upgraded the Hammond Suzuki C/V a notch. I hope it has and if I find that this is in fact the case I will give my impressions on this thread.

 

 

 

 

[AnotherScott]

mak1457 - I'm dissing only the engineers that short changed config options - AND - the a-holes that reviewed this thing on the web. I had no access to this thing before I bought it - so now i have to pay to return it. If anyone had done a decent review ONLINE, perhaps I would have saved those shipping costs.

 

You listed 4 complaints. You admit that #1 wasn't really an issue. Neither is #2... plenty of boards don't allow you to switch pedal polarity, you just need to use the correct pedal. #4 has never been reported by anyone else that I've seen, and you haven't been able to duplicate it. Maybe it was a defect in your board or your pedal, maybe it was some kind of user error (loose connection?), maybe a power glitch... if it happened once and can't be reproduced, I wouldn't assume it's an actual design flaw, and if no one else has seen it, I wouldn't expect to see it in a review.

 

That leaves not being able to change the MIDI transmit channels. Which just means it doesn't suit your purposes. You could have discovered this in advance if you had downloaded the manual from their web site before buying it... an especially good idea for any board you're going to buy without being able to try it first. This limitation isn't a problem for everyone, and for lots of people, more customizable channelization can be done on the other end if needed. The Numa simply doesn't have a programmable interface. To some people, that's a flaw... to others, it's a virtue. The operation is simple and direct. There's no LCD screen, there is no menu diving. But there is also minimal customization. As for your statement, "DO YOU KNOW HOW EASY IT WOULD BE TO PLUG AN APP INTO THE USB AND LET US CHANGE THINGS LIKE MIDI CHANNELS AND SUSTAIN PEDAL POLARITIES?" -- everything always looks easy to the people who aren't doing it.

 

As for the overdrive, I don't know about the Numa 2, but I thought the Numa 1 OD was much better than Hammond's... and even Hammond fans will often tell you that OD is its weak point.

 

As I see it, your most valid complaint is that you don't think the Numa sounds as good as the Hammond. Fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinions about these things, and should buy what they like best. Each board has its pros and cons. Sound qualities are subjective. And as a controller, the Hammond lets you select whatever MIDI channels you want, but the Numa has pitch and mod wheels. Nothing is perfect.

[Doerfler]

Call this my online review.

Tommybuoy -

 

one of our moderators, who is also the editor of Keyboard Magazine, has a different opinion than you. Here is his ONLINE REVIEW

Different keyboards for different people. Glad for you about your XK1-c. You know, anything else is just a clone.

[dazzjazz]

The Numa 2 is NOT the KeyB engine. I have a good source for this fact.