The 73/76 keys saga (industry discussion)

[dalpozlead]

Shame here for not thinking about this earlier…. Never browsed synth keys other than 61 notes.

The standard for 76 notes seems to start on E, which I don’t like as we loose the complete lower octave…

Now I saw some 73 note Korgs (Kronos) has the same structure, starting with the E, and the new ones (Nautilus, Krome) starting on C, which I like the most.

Just amazed… no criteria at all…

[kaptainkeys]

1 minute ago, dalpozlead said:

The standard for 76 notes seems to start on E

My guess is that this is because a lot of 73 key electromechanical instruments like a 73 key Rhodes or CP70 start on E also, and probably why the Grandstage, Vox, and Kronos 73s also start on E.

1 minute ago, dalpozlead said:

and the new ones (Nautilus, Krome) starting on D

The Krome, Nautlius, and M3 73 all start on C

[dalpozlead]

6 minutes ago, GotKeys said:

My guess is that this is because a lot of 73 key electromechanical instruments like a 73 key Rhodes or CP70 start on E also, and probably why the Grandstage, Vox, and Kronos 73s also start on E.

The Krome, Nautlius, and M3 73 all start on C

Sure, Ive edited my post

[Delaware Dave]

Until a couple of years ago they use to start on F.

[Stokely]

The bottom note doesn't matter much to me as I tend to stay out of that range in my band...for splits, the best bottom note would depend on the key of the song.

What is kind of annoying is when the top note is not C, and this mainly due to a few organ songs where I'm used to zipping up there for that top note

[drawback]

Starting on F was the biggest peeve I had with Nords. Guitars begin at E and I play with guitars. As for the top key, I almost never play in the top octave so E works for me. 
 

 

[AnotherScott]

56 minutes ago, Delaware Dave said:

Until a couple of years ago they use to start on F.

I never saw anyone but Nord or Hammond start on F. I don't think any Korg, Roland, Yamaha, or Kurzweil ever started on F. (Did I miss someone else who did?) I suppose the F rationale could have come from emulating the Clavinet. Though I think more likely, it was because Fatar simply didn't offer/manufacture a waterfall low E key at the time. (You might think it would be the same as the high C key of a 61, but nope, the internals don't line up, as those of us who modified those Hammonds and Nords discovered. We had to use a different key, and there would be a hole where the black key to the left would otherwise have gone, to be filled by a wood block or whatever. There are threads about that here, I'm sure. Learjeff knew all about this stuff. I wonder what happened to him? Hope he's okay.

 

48 minutes ago, Stokely said:

The bottom note doesn't matter much to me as I tend to stay out of that range in my band...for splits, the best bottom note would depend on the key of the song.

 

If you play LH bass, you want to be able to go down to the low E to cover most rock/pop where the bass was played by the typical 4-string bass. Being able to go down a bit more doesn't hurt, C is probably ideal, so as not to get stuck on outliers, where the bass E was tuned down to D, or there was synth-bass, or a 5-string bass, or if your singer wants to drop the key of a song a whole step. But I can live with E. Couldn't live with F, though.

 

51 minutes ago, Stokely said:

What is kind of annoying is when the top note is not C, and this mainly due to a few organ songs where I'm used to zipping up there for that top note

 

Yup. Especially if it's an organ-centric board, I would prefer the top note be C. So a 73 C-to-C is my preference. I mentioned elsewhere that I ended up with the 61 SK Pro because the 73 I wanted was unavailable. My plan at the time was to have someone 3D print a "block" I could place over the top keys that would prevent me from sliding any further than the top C. (Hammond does at least have a nice feature where you can silence the keys above the high C, which is a simple, brilliant menu option, and that gets you most of the way there by itself, but I figured the physical block would be even better, to avoid even the possibility of accidental silence, which is, of course, at least better than accidental wrong note!

 

Anyway, back to the OP... In recent years, Korg seems to have standardized on 73 C-to-C on their non-hammer boards, while going E-to-E in their hammer action boards, which I think makes sense. The hammer actions give you the range of the 73-key Rhodes, the non-hammer actions give you the top note of an organ. The Vox Continental is an odd exception in not going C-to-C. but it kinda works out, because it's actually a better Rhodes than it is an organ. ;-)

 

The Numa Organs are also C-to-C (using only the top 61 in its organ mode, but using all 73 in its MIDI controller mode). Off-hand, I don't think anyone but Numa and Korg are doing a 7x-key board where either the low note or the high note is a C. Did I forget anyone? If you go back a bit, Infinite Response had the VAX77 which was low A to high C, that's a nice arrangement too. Has anyone else done that? I seem to remember such a thing existed, but off-hand, I can't think of what it might have been.

 

[BenWaB3]

Another Scott posted:  

<<1 hour ago, Delaware Dave said:

Until a couple of years ago they use to start on F.

I never saw anyone but Nord or Hammond start on F. I don't think any Korg, Roland, Yamaha, or Kurzweil ever started on F. (Did I miss someone else who did?) I suppose the F rationale could have come from emulating the Clavinet. Though I think more likely, it was because Fatar simply didn't offer/manufacture a waterfall low E key at the time. (You might think it would be the same as the high C key of a 61, but nope, the internals don't line up, as those of us who modified those Hammonds and Nords discovered. We had to use a different key, and there would be a hole where the black key to the left would otherwise have gone, to be filled by a wood block or whatever. There are threads about that here, I'm sure. Learjeff knew all about this stuff. I wonder what happened to him? Hope he's okay.>>

 

I think (but have no proof) that a lot of that could be based on the pianos of the 19th century, around Beethoven's era to narrow it down a little. They stopped at the F key. We're so used to the 88 note piano that we don't realize the limitations of earlier times. I remember working on a Beethoven sonata years ago that is in E-major. The last few measures of the first movement have a figure that that has 3 E notes followed by 3 F# notes 10 notes down, then 3 E's and 3 F naturals. I always wondered what possessed him to do it that way until learning about the range of the pianos of his era. It took until the 1880's for Steinway to introduce the 88's we're used to today. That could have been why Hohner ended their clavinets at F, modeling them on the earlier piano keyboards. The Hohner piano bass also ended on F which kept me from trying to get one during that era. That was one of, to me at least, the flaws on the SK-1. I'm glad the SK-PRO goes down to E.

[Meta]

If I could change just one thing about my Kurzweil PC4-7, it would be to make its 76 key range be A-C! That would more accurately cover both piano and organ ranges.

 

As it is I have to do an octave transpose mid song much more often than I would with my preferred logical A-C 76 note range. Starting on E makes ZERO sense to me. And I play both guitar and bass. The low note on guitar or bass should in no way limit the range of my KEYBOARD!

 

If anyone knows a way to modify the PC4-7 to change the key range to A-C, I'm all ears. 

[Josh Paxton]

For me it depends on what I'm using the board for. For piano or EP, I don't much care. But if I'm playing left-hand organ bass, then anything other than a C-to-C layout is useless and a waste of space. With a C-to-C layout I can get two octaves of lower-manual bass, and then four octaves of upper manual above it, with the upper manual's lowest octave duplicating the pitches of the lower manual's highest octave. But if I want to do that with with an E-to-E or F-to-F layout, I have to be willing to sacrifice the lowest 4 or 5 keys in the bass. And that, friends, is a hard deal breaker for me; if I try, I'll just keep reaching for notes that aren't there and getting comically more frustrated as I go. So instead I just duplicate the layout of a split in a 61-note board, with an octave and a half of lower manual and 3 1/2 octaves of upper. In other words, at that point I'm not playing a 73-note board; I'm playing a 61-note board with an extra handful of worthless keys at the top and bottom taking up space onstage, adding weight to my load-in/out, and generally taunting me with the pointless cruelty of their almost-useful-but-not-quite existence.

 

A few years back I thought I had convinced the folks at Hammond of the wisdom of this fundamental truth. Then the Sk Pro 73 came out. If you listen closely, you can still hear the echoes of the "sad trombone" sound that played in my mind the first time I saw it.

[drawback]

I've always thought the F-F keyboard subscribed to traditional thinking that almost everyone played in flats because of horns. 

[eric]

Great thread! When I was using the NS2 as my usual gigging board, I started with the 88 and loved it, still have it. I really wanted the Compact, though the original NS2 Compact started on F and this wasn't to my liking...yes, there was a modification that wasn't really easy and required some minor surgery on the keyboard.

 

Luckily, with the introduction of the NS2 EX, the Compact version started on E and I snatched one up very quickly (plus the NS2 EX 76 for its lightweight HP action). Fast forward to the NS3 and I have two Compacts that both start on E. The prior NS2 EX versions were sold.

 

I remember a thread a long time ago about 76 note weighted boards and our desires to have them run from A-C rather than E-G. The A-C would create the same interaction and muscle memory as an 88, since many of us had been used to grabbing that lowest or highest octave without even looking. I seem to recall maybe one company that did offer a weighted action in A-C, though I don't remember who it was or if I'm just making up things.

 

In any event, there's still something really good about a C-C action that exists in a few of the synth/semi-weighted models. I'd be happy to see this on Nords or other clonewheels, primarily to summon that smear up to the high C that we like so much on organ.

[Mills Dude]

I remember my old Yamaha KX-76 went from E-G.  Could never figure out that one.  What was the utility of that?  C-E or A-C would have been far more useful. 

Despite that flaw, I loved that board, although by todays standards it would be way too heavy.  The action was fantastic and I had no problem entering hex strings in the 2digit LED screen.

[Al Coda]

51 minutes ago, Mills Dude said:

I remember my old Yamaha KX-76 went from E-G.  Could never figure out that one.  What was the utility of that?  C-E or A-C would have been far more useful. 

Despite that flaw, I loved that board, although by todays standards it would be way too heavy.  The action was fantastic and I had no problem entering hex strings in the 2digit LED screen.

 

I own a KX76, owned a KX88 too in the past.

I guess the E-G range comes from "middle C" when you stack that shorter board over a long(er) 88 keys A-C board.

 

C-C is perfect for 61 keys boards.

 

I hated when it started w/ (low) F,- like Clavinet D6.

Same w/ spinet organs ...

I also don´t like E-E much,- even I was a fender Rhodes Stage 73 user for decades.

 

In fact,- I prefer A-C, regardless of count of keys (octaves).

 

Wurlitzer was right w/ their 64-keys A-C action.

 

Starting w/ A and then stack C-C octaves is the right way for weighted/ semi-weighted actions IMO,- but manufacturers obviously have no ear for that,- or,- most users think different.

I dunno.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[kaptainkeys]

21 minutes ago, Al Coda said:

Wurlitzer was right w/ their 64-keys A-C action

Sounds like the Roland RD64 is the controller for you.

[cassdad]

11 hours ago, dalpozlead said:

Shame here for not thinking about this earlier…. Never browsed synth keys other than 61 notes.

The standard for 76 notes seems to start on E, which I don’t like as we loose the complete lower octave…

Now I saw some 73 note Korgs (Kronos) has the same structure, starting with the E, and the new ones (Nautilus, Krome) starting on C, which I like the most.

Just amazed… no criteria at all…

I agree completely, and have stated previously..... I wish that "shorter keyboards" would simply steal keys from the TOP, not the bottom.  I'm a strong bass/left-hand player, and I absolutely need a keyboard that goes down to the standard "A"!  Why manufacturers think I need the "plinkly" keys all the way at the top is beyond me.  Heck, that last octave at the top, including on a real acoustic piano, are keys which almost have more noise than pitch.  In my opinion, they are way less useable than the keys at the bottom end.  Just my personal opinion and preference. 

[Dockeys]

12 hours ago, cassdad said:

I agree completely, and have stated previously..... I wish that "shorter keyboards" would simply steal keys from the TOP, not the bottom.  I'm a strong bass/left-hand player, and I absolutely need a keyboard that goes down to the standard "A"!  Why manufacturers think I need the "plinkly" keys all the way at the top is beyond me.  Heck, that last octave at the top, including on a real acoustic piano, are keys which almost have more noise than pitch.  In my opinion, they are way less useable than the keys at the bottom end.  Just my personal opinion and preference. 

 

I feel exactly the same. I rarely use the upper octave of my piano/keyboard..even if Im doing Red Garland style block chording I still find myself with nearly an octave to spare on top. Im always looking to have a low C or A and while it's useful have the space on top if I have multiple splits, give me the lower range anyday over the top if I had to choose. 

[rogs]

Yamaha created a new waterfall keybed for their YC61. 

When they subsequently offered  73 and 88 note versions of the YC range I thought the 88 note would be weighted - that makes sense - but really hoped the 73 note would be a C- C extended version of their new 61 note waterfall.

But no, they made that 73 note version weighted as well -- although with a different key bed from the 88?

 

I'm sure they had their reasons?

 

[Al Coda]

10 hours ago, GotKeys said:

Sounds like the Roland RD64 is the controller for you.

 

No,- not good enough and even I mentioned Wurlitzer,- I wanted 6 octaves A - C, w/ a ft-switch toggle Oct.- up/down.

 

A.C.

[AnotherScott]

2 hours ago, rogs said:

really hoped the 73 note would be a C- C extended version of their new 61 note waterfall.

But no, they made that 73 note version weighted as well -- although with a different key bed from the 88?

 

I'm sure they had their reasons? -  the phrase ' inscrutable Japanese'  keeps coming to mind though.... 

 

 

There is a market for 73 waterfall AND for 73 hammer action, ideally Yamaha would offer both. But making two versions of the same size action (hammer and non) is very rare. Kronos had two versions of 88 (with the LS), Nord has two versions of a 7x-key Stage 3 (possibly because the control surface was so big that they were not able to offer a 61), those are the only ones I can think of. Otherwise, for whatever reason, a company goes only one way or the other. (And for a long time, a common wish on this forum has been for a wider selection of sub-88 weighted action boards.)

 

Ironically, when the YC61 first came out, I really wished for a YC73 waterfall; but as it turned out, here we are three years later, and I"m glad for the 73 hammer action version, because based on my current needs, that's actually the better one for me!

 

As for why the 73 has a different action from the 88, I assume it's because often the reason someone wants a smaller-than-88 hammer action board is that they want a hammer action board that is as small and light as possible, and the different action of the 73 is a lighter action that allows the board to come in at under 30 lbs. Nord made the same decision in offering the hammer action Nord Stage 3, Nord Stage 2EX, Nord Piano 2, and Nord Piano 3 with different hammer actions in their 88 and 7x-key versions, as did Dexibell in their S3/S7. Some people have wished for sub-88 hammer boards only because they want something smaller and don't care so much about the weight difference, I'm not saying that's not also a potential viable market, but for others, the weight matters too, and the manufacturer has to make a choice. Some go one way, some go the other. 7x hammer action boards that do have the same actions as their 88 versions include Nord Piano 5 (also the original Stage/Stage EX/Stage 2), Kurzweil Forte, Korg Kronos/SV1/SV2/Grandstage, Yamaha P125/P121 though that last one would also because Yamaha doesn't make any action that is lighter than the one in the 88-key version to begin with.

[Morrissey]

13 hours ago, Al Coda said:

 

 

In fact,- I prefer A-C, regardless of count of keys (octaves).

 

Wurlitzer was right w/ their 64-keys A-C action.

 

 

 

Now that you mention it, Wurlies have always felt very comfortable.  Hadn't considered the role of the truncated A-C range in providing that comfort.

[Tom Williams]

Fun thread!  Thanks, Al, for confirming my memory of the D6 bottoming out on F.  A friend of mine in the early 1980s had inherited a 19th century Steinway that stopped at F, as I recall.  I forget what was at the top.  The Bosendorfer 225, less famous than the Imperial Grand, had (has?) an extra 4 keys at the bottom for a Very Low F which, at 21 Hz, is pretty much the lowest note we can hear as a note. 

 

I'm pretty happy with the E-G range of my PC4-7; once in a while I take the KB3 organ to the illegal high note of D.

[Shamanzarek]

I held off on buying a Nord for years because the bottom key was an F. I really need a low E when playing left-hand bass. I got the Stage 3 Compact and while I would prefer a few more keys on top 73 is usually adequate.