Crumar Seven

[mate stubb]

[jazzpiano88]

I never thought I'd see the day when people on KC were salivating about FM piano sounds!

 

I salivate. I've come really really close to replicating the long lost Yamaha GS1 FM EP swirl on the Montage.

 

As for the Crumar, the Rhodes demo sounds pretty incredible to my ears. More tasty than the Chick MkV samples on the Montage and the CP4.

 

 

[Al Coda]

As for the Crumar, the Rhodes demo sounds pretty incredible to my ears.

 

YES !

 

A.C.

[Al Coda]

Bump mods do not a great action make. Been there, tried that. One could say it makes it suck a bit less.

 

But you have to agree on, Deodato, Chick, Herbie, the Joes (Zawinul and Sample), R.Tee and more others played brilliant stuff w/ those modded actions,- no ?

 

I myself owned a 1970s Fender Rhodes MkI and got the action slighly modded later (which I guess was the bump mod,- maybe more),- and I beat the s##t out of that thing for more than 15 years.

I really loved my Rhodes and played it every day,- in studios, clubs, festivals ... etc.

 

A.C.

[Barryjam]

Is the Rhodes on the Seven the same that is on the MOJO61?

[jeffincltnc]

Elmer - When Justin Bieber is playing on the oldies station, it'll be time for me to take a nice long dirt nap.

[Al Coda]

So you say, in the past when the electronic instruments were more reliable, the humans were less imperfect ?

 

You're comparing instruments made 30 years ago in Japan or other asian Countries to instruments made today by smaller Companies located in EU or US. I'm sorry, but it's even worse than comparing apples and oranges.

 

No, when I bought my SCI Prophet 5 rev3,- in opposite to the rev2 model I bought before, it was very reliable and usable for concert touring in the hands of roadies, clubs and outdoor festivals as well as studios,- and it was NOT built in Japan or other asian countries,- it was made in the US by a small company which went bancrupt later when they expanded their product line too much.

 

The same ruled for my Oberheim OB-8 and still rules for my Xpander which both were made in the US by a small company at the end of the day suffering from the same destiny.

 

And what´s up to my last (out of three) Minimoog D which is even older ?

Or my Fender-Rhodes and Rhodes pianos, the Hohner Clavinet D6 and other´s which worked w/o need for repairs for decades ?

 

B.t.w., the Oberheim products made in Japan were not that good, p.ex. the japanese versions of Matrix-12 and Xpander.

The Matrix-1000 was "o.k.",- ignoring the firmware bug in global features.

The DPX-1 was good though.

The Oberheim XK was and is some desaster,- it needs the most service here !

 

(Don´t reply HERE, read more below)

 

1. What was the cost of a brand new DX7 in 1983 and what was the average income in the same year? You needed to sum 6 monthly salaries to afford a DX7.

 

2. What was (and still is) the average cost of an asian worker? It was (and still is) at least 1/4 of an average western worker.

 

I'm not going further because these two aspects alone should be more than enough to help you understand the difference between now and then, and between here and there.

 

No, they aren´t at all !

Work might be cheaper today in other regions of the world, but components were sometimes WAY more expensive than today ...

And your price calculation already orient oneself on competition.

(below >>>)

 

1st, please take it as a given I have no interest in criticising Crumar or GSi product´s build quality.

Up to now I don´t own any of your products, so I don´t have any experience w/ those.

There´s no need to defend something because I just only replied on Dave B.´s post #2914288 - 03/11/18 08:36 PM ,- that´s all.

 

And now I repeat myself w/ my statement:

"The customer don´t has to care about manufacturer´s business risk, may they be small or global players!"

 

As a founder of a small company, it is your decision to treat on bigger players feet,- it´s YOUR risk, not the customer´s !

All the price calculation s##t included ...

You pretty well know you have to pay more for smaller quantities of parts than bigger companies buying larger lots and so on.

You pretty well know you cannot produce as many items in the same time the big players do.

And you know all this before you found the small company.

 

Now don´t think I don´t appreciate idealism, I do.

And sometimes I also support it, but I cannot do that always.

But that becomes personal now and I wanted to give just only a general statement.

 

But there's more: instruments are made from several parts - including wood, iron, aluminium, wirings - plus the circuit boards and the silicon components. Let's take the wood alone - can you imagine how the new anti-pollution international regulations have affected the quality of a single piece of wood? And what about the non recyclable parts such as the printed circuit boards or the "lead free" and "ROHS" solder tin? Shall I continue?

 

No, but you do ... why ?

 

What about the lead-less paint? And what about the lack of copper on the planet that causes many electric wire manufacturers to replace the copper wires with copper-plated aluminium-core wires? And what about the freight from Asia to western Countries? Is it cheaper now than 30 years ago? No.

 

C´mon, man,- I´m not an idiot ...

Not only I have a private repair shop in my basement and know very well how electronic instruments look inside,- I also know ALL the manufacturers have to fight w/ those changes, which also all fall pretty much into their business risk as well.

So, when a manufacturer cannot compete w/ then others- he will go out of biz,- that´s life !

The same might happen to me as a musician (making my living from music) too.

So,- to whom do you sell your gear ?

 

It's not the quality of our keyboards that has decreased during all these years, and it's not the quality of the human craftsmanship - it's the quality of everything.

 

Finally,- that´s the truth !

And I regret it is.

 

Nonetheless, I think you do the best you can for your products and I really wish you all the best and success,- not only w/ the "Seven".

 

The Rhodes sounds incredible good in the demos.

 

I also think you made the right step up from using Intel industry standary mobo/ Intel Atom to DSP in MOJO61.

I tell ya, I bought it when it had more than 4 presets,- ideally as much as a real Hammond console offers via the black keys and at least for the upper manual.

 

For me, the "Seven" is a similar thing ...

I just only said, "for that price", today I expect some multi-timbrality from digital instruments.

 

I think most do.

 

There might be some other DSP related limitations preventing from multi timbrality,-

But maybe it´s just only the number of DSPs in use,- no ?

 

What is the cost of a single DSP you use in MOJO61, Gemini or now in "Seven" ?

I imagine, when you buy something and put it into your product, you calculation factor may be x5 or x6.

It´s just only guessing, but I imagine when you add 1 more DSP costing 50.- bucks, that might increase the price for your product, let´s say, by 250 or even 300 bucks.

 

But that´s fine for me when I get more than 1 high quality sound plus independent FX in split or layer mode out of the machine for live performance instead of only ONE at a time!

And that demand doesn´t change because I can have a pad underneath a piano patch.

 

And when it comes to the sounds you offer in the "Seven" p.ex.,- I see it´s all the stuff you already offered in GSi software products,- and even they all might be improved now, all the DSP code was existing already before.

So, you didn´t have to create everything from scratch for all the products and had the chance to pull from some pool,- some advantage other small or boutique companies didn´t had or have.

So, to me,- it´s all moanin´on highest stage, you know.

 

You talked about components above.

When I bought all my vintage synths, electromagnetic instruments and tube amps in the past,- most componets were much more expensive than they are today.

Memory was incredible expensive and logical chips (CMOS) too.

 

Today, most components are WAY MORE cheaper, al is more "integrated" so where you needed more components, larger circuit boards and more soldering connections before, you have all in just only one SMD component today !

In fact it enables offering "hi-end" technology much cheaper to the end-user.

The Behringer D sounds incredibly good for the money, doesn´t it ?

 

But even the components ARE much cheaper, most companies today choose the cheapest crap for mechanical electronic components available,- pots, switches and sliders.

The stuff we all touch all the time and as often, possibly more than in the past,- just because we need haptics to control MIDI in realtime, last but not least for our DAWs too.

 

Manufacturers obviously don´t care much about which desaster on stage a single failure of such component causes.

 

So yes,- I also talked about instruments made 30 years + in the past and in asia,- the old Yamaha product line,- KX series master keyboards, DX7, DX7mkIIFD, QX-1, REV-7, D-1500 ...

They all work up today and sound good,- and when something fails, it´s the display backlight foil.

But all keys, pots, wheels, sliders and even CC pedals work !

And that´s what we need on stage,- reliability,- period.

When we lose that, we lose the job.

 

And when it comes to my job, I don´t care about what asian workers cost and what they cost elsewhere or what limitations there are whith what product by what reason.

It has to work for me and if it doesn´t I won´t buy.

 

Unfortunately, by today´s gear complexity, you don´t recognize if it REALLY works for you early enough,- instead you have to own it to find out because it´s impossible to find out in shops or within 2 weeks before sending it back when buying online,- except you don´t sleep for 2 weeks and ignore family and such.

 

So it´s easy to sell us crap,- and that´s why I´m so picky always.

 

Sorry !

 

A.C.

 

 

[ElmerJFudd]

Elmer - When Justin Bieber is playing on the oldies station, it'll be time for me to take a nice long dirt nap.

 

I hear you. We're approaching having to keep The Stones and Beatles in the set list to appease grandma and grandpa. I remember when that's what Sinatra and Nat King Cole was for. It's a strange new world, always.

[mate stubb]

Bump mods do not a great action make. Been there, tried that. One could say it makes it suck a bit less.

 

But you have to agree on, Deodato, Chick, Herbie, the Joes (Zawinul and Sample), R.Tee and more others played brilliant stuff w/ those modded actions,- no ?

 

Don't know about their actions. I only know that exactly 2 Rhodes pianos I have ever played had an action I liked and could play without feeling impeded, vs dozens that sucked. Curiously, the two good ones were Suitcase 76s. Don't know if that is a clue or not. My own torture device was an 88 Stage.

[mate stubb]

Back to the Seven - I finally was able to listen to the demos again on a good set of headphones.

 

I'm quite impressed with how the modelled acoustic piano sounded on my headphones. It may not have the woodiness of some of the sampled mega libraries, but it did not have any of the false metallic grating overtones I have heard on modelled Rolands or even some of the earlier versions of Pianoteq. I can listen to piano pieces being played on the Seven and not hear anything that causes me to suspend belief.

 

Well done Crumar!

[jimkost2002]

Bump mods do not a great action make. Been there, tried that. One could say it makes it suck a bit less.

 

 

Don't know about their actions. I only know that exactly 2 Rhodes pianos I have ever played had an action I liked and could play without feeling impeded, vs dozens that sucked. Curiously, the two good ones were Suitcase 76s. Don't know if that is a clue or not. My own torture device was an 88 Stage.

 

Dude, there ARE A LOT of unmaintained Rhodes pianos out in the wild with bad actions, but dont throw the proverbial baby out with the bath, please!

 

Chris Carroll, Ken Rich, CEPco and Retrolinear are just some of many who are upholding great standards to keep vintage instruntments up to the standard they deserve.

 

Ive been fortunate to have played many a great Rhodes pianos from all eras, and that is just baseless reasoning, although that same mindset seems to be rampant here.

[Mitch Towne]

Is the Rhodes on the Seven the same that is on the MOJO61?

 

Yes, I believe so.

[ABECK]

Is the Rhodes on the Seven the same that is on the MOJO61?

 

Yes, I believe so.

 

Agree - wouldn't make sense for Crumar to use anything different, as it's the same used by Gemini too.

[ProfD]

I played Whitney and Hall & Oats all thru the 80's (but not Foster era Chicago - a man's gotta have some standards.)

 

But I played NONE of it on a FM piano sound. I used a real Rhodes with phaser, or an MKS-20 Rhodes sound, or a Baldwin ElectroPro - ANYTHING but that abominable sound!

Brotha Moe, modern DPs contain an FM EP facsimile that allows you to right the wrongs of your past. Resistance is futile.

[drawback]

When I first played a Mojo61 at NAMM 2016 I was expecting the Hammond, but it was the Rhodes (and tweakability of the WiFi Editor) that sold me on it.

[mate stubb]

 

Don't know about their actions. I only know that exactly 2 Rhodes pianos I have ever played had an action I liked and could play without feeling impeded, vs dozens that sucked. Curiously, the two good ones were Suitcase 76s. Don't know if that is a clue or not. My own torture device was an 88 Stage.

 

Dude, there ARE A LOT of unmaintained Rhodes pianos out in the wild with bad actions, but dont throw the proverbial baby out with the bath, please!

 

Chris Carroll, Ken Rich, CEPco and Retrolinear are just some of many who are upholding great standards to keep vintage instruntments up to the standard they deserve.

 

Ive been fortunate to have played many a great Rhodes pianos from all eras, and that is just baseless reasoning, although that same mindset seems to be rampant here.

 

You miss my point. I did everything I could to make the action of my Rhodes better. I did the pedestal mod. Moved the felt from the hammers to the keybase so that smooth plastic moved against felt instead of wood. Lubricated the hammers. This was not an unmaintained instrument. I spent months working on it! It was an instrument that despite all my efforts continued to play like crap.

 

I'm happy you have had better luck than I have, but I stand by my personal experiences.

[MojoGuyPan]

Totally agree with Moe here. The actions on most real Rhodes I seen in the wild are crappy, the TL100 being much nicer. I'm going to give it a shot this weekend controlling the 61 with my SL Stage and see how I make out.

 

See if I dig it like KenHeeter.

[Adan]

I'm not as down on the TP100 action as some folks. When I had an Electro HP I got used to it quickly and even came to like it. But it's not particularly Rhodes-like. In fact it's not like any keyboard I've ever played. I think they picked TP100 for the Seven because it keeps the overall weight down, not because it feels like a Rhodes or any other keyboard emulated by the Seven.

[ElmerJFudd]

 

CP Engine

 

[video:youtube]

[jimkost2002]

 

 

You miss my point. I did everything I could to make the action of my Rhodes better. I did the pedestal mod. Moved the felt from the hammers to the keybase so that smooth plastic moved against felt instead of wood. Lubricated the hammers. This was not an unmaintained instrument. I spent months working on it! It was an instrument that despite all my efforts continued to play like crap.

 

I'm happy you have had better luck than I have, but I stand by my personal experiences.

 

I didnt miss your point.

I totally hear YOU had a difficult instrument that YOU did everything in your power to make work for you.

I just know that I can only do things up to a certain point, then I take it to the pros.

And I would say that 105 (that I can recall since I started in this biz) statistically trumps a mere 1 or a handful.

 

 

[jimkost2002]

Totally agree with Moe here. The actions on most real Rhodes I seen in the wild are crappy, the TL100 being much nicer.

 

So (to use a car analogy), if I drove a few (less than 10) 1966 Mustangs that were poorly maintained, if at all and then drove 1 or 2 slightly above that quality and then said Most 1966 Mustangs Ive seen in the wild drove like crap and somebody came along and said Yeah, but it sounds like you had bad experiences and thats not the standard, just what happened to you would you keep defending your less extensive, but valid SUBJECTIVE experience against the standard of others with more experience?

 

That being said, I am looking forward to trying the Seven in 2weeks and will report on it as compared to my VV

[jimkost2002]

I'm not as down on the TP100 action as some folks. When I had an Electro HP I got used to it quickly and even came to like it. But it's not particularly Rhodes-like. In fact it's not like any keyboard I've ever played. I think they picked TP100 for the Seven because it keeps the overall weight down, not because it feels like a Rhodes or any other keyboard emulated by the Seven.

 

Adan, perfectly stated! I couldnt agree more, I have had EXACTLY that experience with the Electro HP as well and that is my trepidation regarding the Seven. But I will report back when i get mine.

[ABECK]

CP Engine

 

I've never played an Electric Grand, but have certainly heard my share on many, many recordings. To me, it just doesn't sound like any recording or sample of a CP that I'm used to. Feels like there is so much character missing. (Feel the same way with the modeled CP on the Gemini).

[DanL]

CP Engine

 

I've never played an Electric Grand, but have certainly heard my share on many, many recordings. To me, it just doesn't sound like any recording or sample of a CP that I'm used to. Feels like there is so much character missing. (Feel the same way with the modeled CP on the Gemini).

 

I wasn't impressed with this sound either. Almost pianet like, very plinky with no sustain.

[ElmerJFudd]

Hi, Dan. Is it that you find the sound of the Yamaha CP80/70 plinky with little sustain or just GSi's model?

 

In an earlier A/B video in the thread he shows how the model matches up against the real thing.

 

[video:youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1Y2Bz50P-M

[ABECK]

No doubt it sounds like the one in the vid...so, my question is, is there something about the signal chain responsible for the way it sounds. I can only assume there was typically a lot of post processing, or fx/amp sound on the recordings I'm used to.

 

Here's a random example of more of the type of sound I'm used to.

 

[video:youtube]

[Delaware Dave]

the 7 sounds like it blended a harpsichord in the sound for the CP. Now he does mention that the CP was in bad shape with strings missing and such, but in the one on one comparison, tonally they don't sound the same to me.

 

The FM comparison on the other hand does sound pretty close.

 

I try to avoid using either sound so these would be just bonus sounds based on my use. These are included in the Gemini module but honestly I never have used them. If I need the occasional DX or CP I usually go with the ones in my PC3.

[ElmerJFudd]

I do enjoy the variation in tone the DX and CP give to keyboard playing, as well as the Tine and Reed instruments. Both in band and solo context on a long gig, it's pleasing both to listener and me to have a variety of timbres - and the right ones for the song in some cases.

 

The real DX has a rounder, fatter more mellow tone than the model in the Seven (as presented). I would attribute this to the DA conversion in the Seven compared to the Yamaha DX7. And the difference in the CPs related to digital vs. analog sound source and the colour of the converters. Maybe Crumar can give us an idea of what they are using on their Gemini hardware with regard to the DAC. Obviously they can't change the DAC for every instrument they are trying to emulate so perhaps some magic can be made with filters, eq and the amp simulators when going direct.

 

There is amp simulation in the Seven - and obviously these recordings are direct and we are going to get a different tone depending on what we are using for amplification live.

[DanL]

Hi, Dan. Is it that you find the sound of the Yamaha CP80/70 plinky with little sustain or just GSi's model?

 

In an earlier A/B video in the thread he shows how the model matches up against the real thing.

 

[video:youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1Y2Bz50P-M

 

The GSI one. It's very thin sounding to me. The versions in my Electro and even in my FA08 are much richer sounding with nice sustain.

 

[ZioGuido]

No doubt it sounds like the one in the vid...so, my question is, is there something about the signal chain responsible for the way it sounds. I can only assume there was typically a lot of post processing, or fx/amp sound on the recordings I'm used to.

 

Here's a random example of more of the type of sound I'm used to.

 

[link omitted]

 

 

 

The CP in that video is a mix between the line signal and the acoustic sound, and this also explain why the lid is open and the recording is stereo. A CP has only a mono output.

 

The Seven models the sound of a CP as it comes from the line outputs, with the EQ set flat and the Brilliance switch on HIGH.

 

In the video I made with the real CP there's an obvious difference between the two, because the real CP is very detuned and sounds much darker than it should if it was serviced, but I mostly wanted to demonstrate how realistic the Seven responds on ribatutto and dynamic changes.

 

As for the tone itself, the Seven can be adjusted to sound anyway you like, darker, brighter, detuned, resonant, and so on. The default preset is set to sound like a well mantained CP, straight from its mono line output.

 

I might do a new video demonstrating how it can be blended to sound in different ways.

 

However, the CP simulation in the current Gemini version is different than the one in the Seven, which was completely rewritten from the gound up. The next update for the gemini will replace the old model with the new one.