Hammond SKX Pro

[Jim Alfredson]

6 hours ago, Losendoskeys said:

Observations - I don't think the SKX Pro is much better than the SKX, though it seems to be able to have more volume without distorting.
I don't think the Leslie emulation is better than a Vent, so that stays.

I have no use for the internal sounds but I will explore them in due course in case my outboard MIDI Roland fantom XR Rack fails.

An expensive upgrade but worth it for the better layout.  

 

The high drawbars and playing higher up the keyboard is where the differences really lie. The upper end of the MTW engine is far better than the old VASE III engine in the previous SK line-up. Also the virtual contacts helps with rhythmic playing in terms of authenticity.

[Jim Alfredson]

I’ve been using the SK Pro 73 as my only board a lot lately, as I’ve been doing a bunch of fly dates with no keyboard backline. I love everything about it… except the damn acoustic pianos. With Janiva Magness, we play a song entitled “Weeds Like Us” that has a very exposed and subtle piano part and the lack of sustain and string resonance of the piano in the SK Pro just drives me up the wall. It sounds so fake. I might start using my iPad Pro with the Ravenscroft piano plugin on it because I’m at my wits end. I’ve tweaked the acoustic piano as much as I can in the SK Pro and it just doesn’t work.

Hammond Suzuki needs to update it with better samples. That’s the only solution. There’s enough memory in there. My understanding is that the original SK line had 128mb of memory for ALL the samples in it. The SK Pro is 1GB, I believe. You can get a damn good piano sample in there plus all the other stuff.

[Al Quinn]

I have an SK Pro 61 and agree with Jim: the APs don’t cut it. I tried using them on one gig and one rehearsal and said never again. Drove me nuts! If bought a Dexibell SX7 module, which has great APs, to remedy the problem. 

[AnotherScott]

3 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

There’s enough memory in there. My understanding is that the original SK line had 128mb of memory for ALL the samples in it. The SK Pro is 1GB, I believe. You can get a damn good piano sample in there plus all the other stuff.

The 1.6 system update, which appears to include everything (i.e. also all the sample data), is 566 mb, but that could be compressed, so it's possible that there could be more like 1GB of raw sample data. Either way, though, it is unknown as to whether there is any "unused" rewritable memory in the keyboard. It's possible that, in order to include a larger piano sample set, some other sample set would have to be removed to make room. FWIW, the single biggest file in the update is the piano sample set at 280 mb, which would include the samples for the entire bank of Piano category waveforms (i.e. Yamaha grand, Steinway grand, upright, Electric Grand, toy).

 

3 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

the lack of sustain and string resonance of the piano in the SK Pro just drives me up the wall.

...though that's not necessarily addressable with merely a larger set of piano samples anyway. For example, if you want to make use of pedal-down samples that include the associated resonances, the architecture needs to support playing different samples depending on whether the pedal is down or not, which is not necessarily a function that the SK Pro currently has. Including the "pedal-up" string resonances which vary depending on which other keys are down is more complicated again, and not merely a matter of supplying more samples. (In fact, that function doesn't necessarily involve additional samples at all.) So again, there's more to it than needing "more" or "better" samples, it's possible that deeper changes to the operation of the instrument--which may or may not be feasible--would be required.

[Jim Alfredson]

I can live without string resonance if the samples were longer with more velocity levels.

[Losendoskeys]

18 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

 

The high drawbars and playing higher up the keyboard is where the differences really lie. The upper end of the MTW engine is far better than the old VASE III engine in the previous SK line-up. Also the virtual contacts helps with rhythmic playing in terms of authenticity.

Yes indeed - it is certainly very full with regards the factory patches (which I don't use).
Largely sonically my setup is actually trying to achieve the L100/T100 feel rather than the B3 sounds.

I will explore the monosynth in the fullness of time and also I'm intrigued how good the library of internal samples is now, as I may substitute them for my Fantom XR sounds at some point. At least they could be a useful backup.

Worth saying that the introduction of "patches" and "combinations" is defintely a major improvement over the previous patch structure 

[Jim Alfredson]

The mono synth is surprisingly good. 

 

I agree that the patches and combinations thing is kind of a pain. I do wish you could save either to the favorites instead of having to make a new combination for every organ sound. These are things that engineers think are good ideas, not musicians.

 

[JMcS]

19 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

I can live without string resonance if the samples were longer with more velocity levels.

Does tinkering with the Velocity Offset parameter have an effect on the harmonics etc. that are produced? 

[Jim Alfredson]

1 hour ago, JMcS said:

Does tinkering with the Velocity Offset parameter have an effect on the harmonics etc. that are produced? 

Hi Jim! Good to hear from you! The velocity offset doesn’t really change much in terms of the length of the samples or the velocity levels. Near as I can tell, the piano samples only have three velocity levels, which is early 1990s era sample quality (think Kurzweil’s infamous Triple Strike pianos).

 

My biggest complaint with the SK Pro when I first played the prototype several years before it was released was the quality of the acoustic pianos. I pleaded with Hammond to address them but to no avail. If they really want to compete with Nord and the well-established Electro line, they need to up their game when it comes to the non-organ stuff. 

[drawback]

Somebody please correct me, but my unfounded belief is that Suzuki has a lot to do with the non-organ sample decisions, ie: we have them in our Costco pianos, so Hammond will use them.

[JMcS]

17 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

Hi Jim! Good to hear from you! The velocity offset doesn’t really change much in terms of the length of the samples or the velocity levels. Near as I can tell, the piano samples only have three velocity levels, which is early 1990s era sample quality (think Kurzweil’s infamous Triple Strike pianos).

 

My biggest complaint with the SK Pro when I first played the prototype several years before it was released was the quality of the acoustic pianos. I pleaded with Hammond to address them but to no avail. If they really want to compete with Nord and the well-established Electro line, they need to up their game when it comes to the non-organ stuff. 

Thanks Jim, Boosting the Velocity Offset on my SK-1 made a big difference in how the various voices sounded and I didn't have to beat the keys. I think I wasn't hitting the keys fast/hard enough to trigger the attack harmonics. I thought it might have a similar effect on the newer models. 

[Jim Alfredson]

I understand what you’re suggesting now. That isn’t the issue. The issue is that the samples themselves have very short decay times, even when editing and adjusting the decay as high as it will go. The decay is also very artificial sounding (due probably to the short samples and loop points), and they only have three velocity layers, which means it’s hard to play a wide range of dynamics with any authenticity.

 

They are just outdated samples, to be perfectly honest. I’m not sure where HamSuz sourced them from, but I can’t imagine they paid much for them if it was from a third party vendor. The piano in my Prophet X sounds a thousands times better and it’s not even a keyboard that’s supposed to be a digital piano. Then again, it has a 500GB hard drive in it full of samples of all kinds of stuff. 

[HammondDave]

If the Italians (StudioLogic) can produce a great low price/small memory piano sample, why can’t H/Z do it?  Are they really unable to hear the difference? Hard for me to believe. 

[drawback]

8 minutes ago, HammondDave said:

If the Italians (StudioLogic) can produce a great low price/small memory piano sample, why can’t H/Z do it?  Are they really unable to hear the difference? Hard for me to believe. 

Again, it's gotta be more like won't do it.

[AnotherScott]

54 minutes ago, HammondDave said:

If the Italians (StudioLogic) can produce a great low price/small memory piano sample, why can’t H/Z do it? 

There's tons of things some people can do and others can't. ;-) But which Studiologic are you talking about that you like, and how little memory is it using?

 

And in fairness to Hammond, which doesn't really pretend to be a piano company, I find lots of Roland and Korg piano sounds to be disappointing, and these companies actually make digital pianos! Creating high quality piano sounds apparently isn't so simple...

[allan_evett]

20 hours ago, Jim Alfredson said:

... The issue is that the samples themselves have very short decay times, even when editing and adjusting the decay as high as it will go. The decay is also very artificial sounding (due probably to the short samples and loop points), and they only have three velocity layers, which means it’s hard to play a wide range of dynamics with any authenticity.

 

1 hour ago, HammondDave said:

If the Italians (StudioLogic) can produce a great low price/small memory piano sample, why can’t H/Z do it?  

 

1 hour ago, AnotherScott said:

Creating high quality piano sounds apparently isn't so simple...

 

 

I think H/Z should study Yamaha's approach to digital piano sounds.  I had a few conversations with Phil Clenndenin of Yamaha, in which I voiced frustrations with sample set size, velocity layers, etc.. It was around the time the S700-based Voices in my S90ES began to wear slightly thin, so to speak; though I did find the Voices still very playable and reasonably expressive. Those conversations were enlightening, as I began to understand how DP design isn't only about  basic velocity layering and sample size. There's a lot of R & D that goes into the fingers-to-ears connection, using rather deep layer/crossfade techniques and  DSP.  That's why I found the initial AWM2 pianos so playable, even with limited sample size.  And Yamaha's subsequent developments using larger samples and greater DSP model exploration has upped the quality and playability of their DP tones.

 

I wish H/Z's labs would purchase a CP-4 and spend some time with it.  I think it would make them more competitive in the one-keyboard-that-could-cover-the-gig market.  

[AnotherScott]

57 minutes ago, allan_evett said:

There's a lot of R & D that goes into the fingers-to-ears connection, using rather deep layer/crossfade techniques and  DSP...I wish H/Z's labs would purchase a CP-4 and spend some time with it.

I believe what you're saying there is accurate about some of the Yamaha DPs, like CP1 and CP5 (with their SCM), and possibly CP4 and some other "dedicated" Yamaha DPs, but I don't think "deep layer/crossfade techniques and  DSP" apply to the "editable synth" straight AWM2 boards like Motifs/MontageMODX. On these boards, you can actually look at exactly how those pianos are assembled out of the supplied waves, and even change those parameters at will. But there is no crossfading in them, and there is no DSP (unless you apply an effect, of course). But Yamaha still has a lot of experience and engineering talent/skill and probably more than other companies have in financial/logistical resources, along with some architectural advantages in the boards (like supporting more velocity layers than some other boards do), that do seem to result in Yamaha often having better sounding acoustic instrument samples than Roland and Korg, for example.  

[b3plyr]

3 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

There's tons of things some people can do and others can't. 😉 But which Studiologic are you talking about that you like, and how little memory is it using?

 

Good question. Probably not the Piano X as it has 2 GB and uses some compression. 

[Al Coda]

11 hours ago, b3plyr said:

the Piano X as it has 2 GB and uses some compression.

 

Studiologic Numa X  uses physical modelling for AP and EP,- not samples !

 

The additional sounds are sampled and memory is for "new sound to be installed w/ the manager app".

 

☺️

 

A.C.

 

[b3plyr]

4 hours ago, Al Coda said:

 

Studiologic Numa X  uses physical modelling for AP and EP,- not samples !

 

The additional sounds are sampled and memory is for "new sound to be installed w/ the manager app".

 

☺️

 

A.C.

 

Actually the APs are sampled with modeling for certain aspects, i.e., string resonance, etc. Yes, the EPs are modeled and samples are used for misc sounds. I would be really impressed if they had allowed 2 GB for other sounds. My info is directly from Studiologic.

[Al Coda]

1 hour ago, b3plyr said:

Actually the APs are sampled with modeling for certain aspects, i.e., string resonance, etc. Yes, the EPs are modeled and samples are used for misc sounds. I would be really impressed if they had allowed 2 GB for other sounds. My info is directly from Studiologic.

 

Thx for the info, it´s specs are irritating then.

"Quote:

Acoustic Pianos

Acoustic Modeling Technology

Release samples, Damper and Key-off noises

Zoom controls: Tone, Strings Resonance, Duplex, Damper Noise"

 

When I read these,- I got the impression the acoustic pianos ARE physical modelled (acoustic modelling),- like the electric pianos (electric modelling),- and offer release-samples, Damper and key off noises in addition,- where it´s questionable if Damper and key off noises are samples too.

At least, that´s how I understood it.

 

SL Numa X specs

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[b3plyr]

3 hours ago, Al Coda said:

 

Thx for the info, it´s specs are irritating then.

"Quote:

Acoustic Pianos

Acoustic Modeling Technology

Release samples, Damper and Key-off noises

Zoom controls: Tone, Strings Resonance, Duplex, Damper Noise"

 

When I read these,- I got the impression the acoustic pianos ARE physical modelled (acoustic modelling),- like the electric pianos (electric modelling),- and offer release-samples, Damper and key off noises in addition,- where it´s questionable if Damper and key off noises are samples too.

At least, that´s how I understood it.

 

SL Numa X specs

 

☺️

 

A.C.

I agree. That is why I contacted Studiologic. It should read something like "Sampled pianos enhanced by .................."

[Al Coda]

14 hours ago, b3plyr said:

It should read something like "Sampled pianos enhanced by .................."

 

Yes, exactly !

That´s misleading info because when it´s sampled, it´s set in stone in many ways while true physical modeling should allow more in depth edit parameters.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[tommym]

On 7/15/2022 at 2:10 PM, HammondDave said:

If the Italians (StudioLogic) can produce a great low price/small memory piano sample, why can’t H/Z do it?  Are they really unable to hear the difference? Hard for me to believe. 

I really like my (StudioLogic) NumaCompact 2x. I layer a pad way behind their Stage Piano and it gets a lot of praise. Even so, I went back to my SK-1 (with Jim A's tonewheel set) for a particularly organ-heavy downtown gig, and folks loved that. For me, the weight is the thing; plus aftertouch, the convenience of speakers, mod and pb wheels.... If StudioLogic will make its overdrive more consistent over the keyrange, and bop the Leslie sim up a level, at 15lbs, even with a fantasy keyboard, it might catch on. At that price, I can't believe it hasn't already. Maybe it's the distribution.  PS. the SKXPro demo had me pining for an incredible shrinking ray, sounded so good, and all the split and layering seems useful. Too heavy for me though. Never liked the  Nord organ sound... Nice to hear Jim A. praise the Prophet X's piano. Like it too. Yamaha's CP-300 is another candidate for  Incredible Shrinking Ray.

[AnotherScott]

On 7/17/2022 at 5:44 AM, Al Coda said:

That´s misleading info because when it´s sampled, it´s set in stone in many ways while true physical modeling should allow more in depth edit parameters.

 

They would have different editable parameters (to the extent that the sounds are editable at all), but not necessarily more "in depth." For example, on the Fantoms, the straight PCM sampled sounds have far more in the way of editable parameters than the SuperNATURAL Acoustic sounds (samples+modeling) do.

[KRK]

OK, not 100% comparable to dedicated stage pianos in terms of sound detail, physical modeling, etc....
but it works! (i tested it in some live gigs, one with big PA, one with a medium/small PA and the last just with my Roland SA-1000 and pianos, strings, pads and clavinets are exactly there with other instruments).

 

pianos and clavinet...

 

audio: L/R out direct into Zoom Q4n line in.

other sound sections coming soon...

remember I'm not a musician, so just listen to the sound and not pay attention to my hands 🤣

[Delaware Dave]

Sounds like the piano used on Journey's " Faithfully".

[DaBous]

Since this thread is discussing the SK Pro Piano I thought I would share this. I did this video about a year ago - when I first got my SK Pro 73 ( I have since replaced it with an SKX PRO ) to compare the SK Pro piano with the Nord piano in a band context. First solo is the SK Pro, next song ( 2:15 ) it's the NS3 .They are going through a motion sound KP 610S behind me. This was recorded with a gopro.

 

This video also features the locally famous sideways dancing guy  🤣 .

 

 

[KRK]

OK, just for info...
 

Another "video on demand" 🤣

"but how does it sound with Ventilator?"

"but how does it sound with Burn?"

etc...

these are the typical questions that come to me in the comments on my videos ...

 

So, here is yet another useless video that makes us understand (if you listen with an adequate system or headphones) how things are .

Repetitive chords with the same settings in sequence, with the various simulators. The perception of how everything sounds different is immediate, with the same settings (more or less pronounced click, more or less "fake" percussion, more or less exalted chorus, etc.).

 

Excellent cabinet "fatness" in the Ventilator, but the "turn" of the horn is somehow "artificial" (you can hear a "circle" of sound, always perfect, which does not correspond to what happens when miking a leslie). But that's probably the one that always comes out better in the various mixes.

 

The Burn behaves like a miked leslie (in this example I used one of the various configurations available, with the exaltation of the horn rotation, which however reproduces what happens when miking a leslie). The FULL DRAWBARS / CHORUS setting suffers less than the Ventilator.

 

IK Multimedia ... in certain passages it performs better than my leslie 3300W miked and penalized inside the soundproof isobox! You can perceive the "wood" of the cabinet, today a good reference for those who work in the studio... At 12:12 you can perceive that typical characteristic of the horn driver saturation due to the tube amp (none of the other simulators produces that very delicate but unmistakable "grit").

 

Rotary Simulations test...

[Stokely]

What that video above tells me, and not something I didn't already know--in a live setting through a PA, especially a more rock setting, most things will work.  Both of those pianos sounded fine to me and I didn't see anyone leaving   Maybe that keyboard nerd in the back taking critical notes.