Crumar Mojo 61 Review - (LONG)

[ElmerJFudd]

it's only 2 guy's, fellas. They would have to become a larger company to accomplish this.

 

It's ok to root for team Italia. Most of the work is done - they finished the GSi DMC-121 and the Gemini card. They only need offer additional actions and a model with pitch/mod. Synth patches for the,VA can be commissioned and from what we gather from their responses to critics of the acoustic piano, they are working on it. Should they succeed in the endeavor to compete with the Electro, Stage, Sk1 - it's good for us as Crumar/GSi already has proven they can beat a price point with the Mojo61. It's not hard to beat Nord on price - at least not in the US.

[Spider76]

Yes, I think they really don't care about competing with Clavia or H/S.

They do their own thing, that is essentially recreating Hammond sounds with almost manic precision.

 

But they already did a lot more: inserting additional high-quality sounds, improving the fatar keybed, doing the single manual, the double manual controller and the expander, all the while responding to almost every customer's request... And maybe most important, getting out of the boutique and securing distribution from the main channels in both EU and USA.

 

Honestly, those are HUGE achievements for a still very young 2-man company.

If they go on like that, I agree that their trajectory will soon intersect the Electros and SKs. But it will be a consequence of their development, not a driving force.

 

 

Anyway, being Italian and enjoying products made with passion and dedication, I root for them and wish them every success. It would be nice to have an Italian company return to the main stage of keyboard production, like it was in the 70s and 80s

[Mitch Towne]

I agree with Mate...the Mojo 61 has a much better action then the Electro 5.

[DanL]

Mate didn't say the action was better, only lighter.

[Jazz+]

I like the Mojo 61's action for Organ and Rhodes with its high key trigger point. I compared with SK-1 and Electro 5 and preferred Mojo 61's action

 

I think the Mojo 61 sampled piano sounds really good, very clear and present..

 

But, the Mojo 61 Acoustic Piano is set more towards the low trigger points (which makes sense) but that makes it harder for me to to run lines at very fast tempos. It's fine for medium tempo and slow playing. An adjustable velocity scale might be helpful. Or perhaps a dynamic range limiter control in the editor so it could take more advantage of the high trigger points somehow. As it is now the piano higher trigger points yield pianissimo dynamic level, therefore you have to hit the bottom trigger to get a mezzo forte dynamic. On a good grand piano the hammers can be thrown mezzo forte half way thru the key stroke without having to firmly hit the bottom of the keybed.

The Mojo Rhodes, Wurly and Clav have a narrower dynamic range (a good thing), that gives me the the advantage of being able to play around the higher (half way) trigger points (like the organ) which enables faster playing.

 

[ElmerJFudd]

Jazz+, are you suggesting you've got to the bottom of your laggy acoustic piano issue? Have you tried triggering the Mojo 61's acoustic piano with your PX-350?

 

[Jazz+]

I like the Mojo 61's action for Organ and Rhodes with its high key trigger point. I compared with SK-1 and Electro 5 and preferred Mojo 61's action

 

I think the Mojo 61 sampled piano sounds really good, very clear and present..

 

But, the Mojo 61 Acoustic Piano is set more towards the low trigger points (which makes sense) but that makes it harder for me to to run lines at very fast tempos. It's fine for medium tempo and slow playing. An adjustable velocity scale might be helpful. Or perhaps a dynamic range limiter control in the editor so it could take more advantage of the high trigger points somehow. As it is now the piano higher trigger points yield pianissimo dynamic level, therefore you have to hit the bottom trigger to get a mezzo forte dynamic. On a good grand piano the hammers can be thrown mezzo forte half way thru the key stroke without having to firmly hit the bottom of the keybed.

The Mojo Rhodes, Wurly and Clav have a narrower dynamic range (a good thing), that gives me the the advantage of being able to play around the higher (half way) trigger points (like the organ) which enables faster playing.

 

I wanted to mention that imo the Mojo 61 blows away the Hammond SK-'s acoustic piano. And that the Electro, with its Fatar action, also suffers from having to have to deep a trigger point for AP.

[Jazz+]

Jazz+, are you suggesting you've got to the bottom of your laggy acoustic piano issue? Have you tried triggering the Mojo 61's acoustic piano with your PX-350?

 

Yes, I now realize it's all about the Fatar action, the velocity scale , and the trigger points.

 

I have played the Mojo 61 AP and Rhodes with MIDI from my Casio Px-360 and the finger to key-sound response is fabulous. No problem with Mojo 61 acoustic piano response at high speed lines. It feels as if hammers are being thrown with a minimum of effort when played from the Casio as the controller. Simply marvelous. It would be so great if Crumar could find away to overcome the Fatar thing and somehow more mimic the trigger settings and velocity curves of the Casio.

[mate stubb]

You dream sir, as do we all. There's just no getting around the fact that organ action has completely different requirements than piano action.

[AnotherScott]

I like the Mojo 61's action for Organ and Rhodes with its high key trigger point.

...

But, the Mojo 61 Acoustic Piano is set more towards the low trigger points (which makes sense)

...

The Mojo Rhodes, Wurly and Clav have a narrower dynamic range (a good thing), that gives me the the advantage of being able to play around the higher (half way) trigger points (like the organ) which enables faster playing.

With a typical 2-sensor action (including Fatar's waterfall), there are only two possible places to trigger a Note On event... toward the top (with no velocity info, which works fine for organ, but would not work well for piano or most other sounds), or toward the bottom (with velocity info).

 

If the Mojo is actually triggering Rhodes/Wurly/Clav from the high sensor, then dynamic range would indeed be narrow... in fact, it would be non-existant, each strike would be the exact same volume. Is that what you're experiencing?

 

The only variable besides that, is whether they *release* toward the bottom of their travel (bottom sensor) or near the top.

[ElmerJFudd]

Well there's also the velocity curve which could just be not matched well to the piano sample set. Jazz+, have you tried reverse? Trigger Casio piano sound from Mojo61 MIDI out. Does the Casio piano sound play like poo from the organ action?

[Stokely]

Piano without velocity info I would think would be useless...short of some super-compressed pop piano thing

[ElmerJFudd]

Of course. So how well does the Mojo61's action and curve(s) manipulate the electric piano models and various other samples that beg for velocity data?

[mate stubb]

Everything besides organ on Mojo 61 uses the bottom contact point to trigger. It HAS to - the only way to measure velocity is the time between the top contact breaking and the bottom contact making.

 

The EPs have been responsive enough to play if playing from an unweighted action is your thing, Rhodes especially. Me, I gotta have a hammer action except for rehearsals and emergencies.

 

The latest software rev for Mojo 61 trimmed a few milliseconds from the front of the piano samples to make them feel snappier, but I haven't tried the update yet.

[Jazz+]

Everything besides organ on Mojo 61 uses the bottom contact point to trigger. It HAS to - the only way to measure velocity is the time between the top contact breaking and the bottom contact making.

 

The EPs have been responsive enough to play if playing from an unweighted action is your thing, Rhodes especially. Me, I gotta have a hammer action except for rehearsals and emergencies.

 

The latest software rev for Mojo 61 trimmed a few milliseconds from the front of the piano samples to make them feel snappier, but I haven't tried the update yet.

 

I notice the Rhodes seems to sound loud enough from the top trigger, I don't need to hit the bottom trigger with much force, if any. But the piano is too soft at the top trigger and therefore requires from me a fairly hard stroke to the bottom trigger. When playing fast that makes a huge difference, there is not enough time for such exaggerated touch/technique. I would think there could be some sort adjustment scaling added to the editor for an improvement? Am I making sense?

 

[AnotherScott]

I notice the Rhodes seems to sound loud enough from the top trigger, I don't need to hit the bottom trigger with much force, if any. But the piano is too soft at the top trigger

Did you see my msg #2857280? A given sound only has a single trigger point. If a sound uses the high trigger (as organ does), it will have no velocity info (every strike will be the same volume, no matter how hard or softly you strike it). If it uses the low trigger point (like piano), hitting a key will make no sound whatsoever until you press it far enough to get past the low trigger point (but it will have velocity info, so that hard strikes can be loud and soft strikes can be soft).

 

 

[ElmerJFudd]

Jazz+, are you saying there is a parameter to choose wether a called up sound has its attack at the top or bottom of the key drop? Are there also different curves available to choose from when measuring velocity between initial press and bottom of key drop?

[Jazz+]

I notice the Rhodes seems to sound loud enough from the top trigger, I don't need to hit the bottom trigger with much force, if any. But the piano is too soft at the top trigger

Did you see my msg #2857280? A given sound only has a single trigger point. If a sound uses the high trigger (as organ does), it will have no velocity info (every strike will be the same volume, no matter how hard or softly you strike it). If it uses the low trigger point (like piano), hitting a key will make no sound whatsoever until you press it far enough to get past the low trigger point (but it will have velocity info, so that hard strikes can be loud and soft strikes can be soft).

 

 

If that is so, how is it that I am able to trigger the Rhodes with half strokes without reaching the bottom? And I can also also somewhat trigger the the (pp) piano with half strokes?

[AnotherScott]

I notice the Rhodes seems to sound loud enough from the top trigger, I don't need to hit the bottom trigger with much force, if any. But the piano is too soft at the top trigger

Did you see my msg #2857280? A given sound only has a single trigger point. If a sound uses the high trigger (as organ does), it will have no velocity info (every strike will be the same volume, no matter how hard or softly you strike it). If it uses the low trigger point (like piano), hitting a key will make no sound whatsoever until you press it far enough to get past the low trigger point (but it will have velocity info, so that hard strikes can be loud and soft strikes can be soft).

 

 

If that is so, how is it that I am able to trigger the Rhodes with half strokes without reaching the bottom? And I can also also somewhat trigger the the (pp) piano with half strokes?

The low trigger is not literally at the bottom. (There is no additional trigger point at the bottom, just a physical stop.) So you can indeed hear sound before you hit bottom. The volume of the sound will be determined by a combination of how hard you hit the key (velocity), how the programmer designed the sound to respond to a given velocity, and any variation provided by optional velocity curve settings. But whatever sound you choose, there is only one Note On trigger point for it within the total key travel. And if the sound responds to velocity, that trigger point is the lower of the two possible trigger points.

[Jazz+]

Scott, can you think of anything to make the piano behave (trigger) more like the Rhodes?

[AnotherScott]

Scott, can you think of anything to make the piano behave (trigger) more like the Rhodes?

I don't have a Mojo, but my guess is that the comments about the velocity curve are on the right track, and practically speaking, it's pretty much up to Crumar to offer the velocity curve option you're looking for. There are ways around that (using Local Off and, for example, a computer or a MIDI Solutions box to alter the velocity response), but that's probably not practical in most situations... at that point, it would probably be better to just hook up your PX360!

[Delaware Dave]

Jazz+, go here:

 

http://www.gsidsp.com

 

Hit select sound, then click on sample player. In the dropdown click on GSI Grand D, then click edit engine. Here are all the adjustments that you can make to the gemini module's piano. There are adjustments for attack, release, velocity, harp and others. The delivered piano was too compressed (not dynamic enough) IMO. I adjusted these parameters until the piano responded the way I wanted it to with my particular TP-8 action. I would have to imagine that if these parameters exist on the Gemini module then they should exist on the Mojo61 as well.

[ElmerJFudd]

On a side note, Jazz+, this guy just took a Casio PX-160 and chopped it.

You could bring it down to a matching 61 or 73k/76 keys and there's the action you like, compact and light weight to play your Mojo61 APs and EPs.

 

http://forum.pianoworld.com/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/2646994/gonew/1/61-key-casio-privia-px-130-keyboard-chopped.html#UNREAD

 

[Mitch Towne]

Something to factor in here is the physical modeling aspects of the electric pianos in the Mojo61. This is the only keyboard I've ever had where, if you press a key slowly and lightly, it makes no sound. The acoustic piano is a sample, so it won't respond the same way.

[AnotherScott]

Something to factor in here is the physical modeling aspects of the electric pianos in the Mojo61. This is the only keyboard I've ever had where, if you press a key slowly and lightly, it makes no sound. The acoustic piano is a sample, so it won't respond the same way.

There's no reason an acoustic piano sample can't respond the same way. All they have to do is assign MIDI velocity 1 to no sample. This is implemented on some sample-based boards.

[LX88]

I have had a Mojo 61 for a few weeks now. The CV is spot on but the sim....I better be careful, but I have not come to terms with it lets just say.

 

I have to have wifi access to edit it as far as I can tell. The cabinet sound is just too much for me. I am getting better results with the HX3 and Numa sim. But I may be able to correct that.

 

The keys are not much different than my Numa. But the raw organ... the CV sound couldn't be better.

 

By the way... there was a shipping damage incident on this one too. I may need to contact someone who services the Mojo. There is some damage to one side. I may need to get some "body parts". The seller claims there were no issues when they shipped it. One side is kind of tweaked.

 

Also... because I was able to A/B the HX3 and the Mojo, I think I have dialed in a pretty good CV setting on the HX3. I should bounce over to the HX3 thread for more about that.

 

Anyway.... damn good raw organ sound when the sim is off.

[Jazz+]

Are you talking cabinet "Stopped" or "Off" ? There is a big difference between the two. Or are you talking Slow and Fast sim?

I like "stopped" for tube sound or "off" for a clean sound.

 

My favorite is the 1965 B3, it's the least aggressive.

I really like the action for organ, I can play it all day without getting sore hands.

The Rhodes is really really good too! I turned down its bark and use it clean (no amp sim) with only a bit of reverb.

[Delaware Dave]

"..damn good raw organ sound when the sim is off...

Acquire a mini Vent and you're done. It has leslie stop and off via the bypass. Think of it this way, even with a hammond you needed either a leslie or a tone cabinet. The mini-vent serves both purposes in the size of a cigarette pack. Send the HX3 back and use some of that money to acquire the mini-vent.

[Mitch Towne]

 

My favorite is the 1965 B3, it's the least aggressive.

 

Try the 1965 C3 also.

[HammondDave]

 

My favorite is the 1965 B3, it's the least aggressive.

 

Try the 1965 C3 also.

 

Yeah... but watch out for that foam...