Viscount Legend 70’s vs Crumar Seven

[bjosko]

 

[bjosko]

I had the opportunity to test the Nord Grand and the Nord Piano 5 a couple weeks ago, and was a bit meh 🫤 

As an owner of both Nord Stage 3 ( but with the HP keys) and a Legend 70’s Compact, I am still looking for a piano for home use.

The Legend was meant to be it, but it ended up in my band rig.

 

In the above video, I think the Legend seems to have a more full sounding Grand, but the EP’s seems very similar to my ears.

I am leaning to a Seven for my home use, as I also have an old Yamaha CP70 I could tune up and replace some strings, and could do for the more acoustic feel I some times miss. Personally I love the mechanical action on the CP70, and normally used it unplugged at home, action was more important than the sound for me.

 

BTW Viscount just released a system update to the Legend recently where they introduced some (adjustable)natural detuning for the EP’s, some fix of the general velocity and 2 upgraded Acoustics piano samples.

I installed it yesterday before rehearsal with my band and the EP’s came to live. Can’t tell much about the AP’s, didn’t had time to test them out, but the dynamics was clearly improved.

[Delaware Dave]

here are the two new acoustic pianos for the Seven.  Pretty impressive: 

 

https://www.genuinesoundware.com/?a=page&p=VeniceGrandC5

 

https://www.genuinesoundware.com/?a=page&p=VeniceGrandD274

 

 

[Al Coda]

13 hours ago, Delaware Dave said:

here are the two new acoustic pianos for the Seven.  Pretty impressive: 

 

https://www.genuinesoundware.com/?a=page&p=VeniceGrandC5

 

https://www.genuinesoundware.com/?a=page&p=VeniceGrandD274

 

 

 

these sound good !

How much sample memory is available in Crumar Seven ?

 

When using Mojo(61) or Gemini (p.ex. w/ DMC 122),- are the sampled Crumar/GSi instruments usable too ?

Is sample memory size different from Crumar Seven ?

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[Delaware Dave]

7 hours ago, Al Coda said:

 

these sound good !

How much sample memory is available in Crumar Seven ?

 

When using Mojo(61) or Gemini (p.ex. w/ DMC 122),- are the sampled Crumar/GSi instruments usable too ?

Is sample memory size different from Crumar Seven ?

 

☺️

 

A.C.

 

I believe the same samples are used in the Gemini module as the Seven and I have both samples loaded in my Gemini.  It's nice to have two high quality sampled pianos; and it really addressed the weakness of the Gemini (and Seven) which were the lack of top tier acoustic piano samples. I still have 1 Gig of open memory left in my Gemini even after loading these two pianos.  

 

In the latest firmware update for the Mojo, Crumar writes:  ".. Mojo 61 brings in the new improvements that have been made to the Tine and Reed EP models, the new 3-band EQ and also opens the doors to the future ability to replace the internal acoustic piano sound with a new one ..".

[francesco verni]

 

[bjosko]

I had to use my free 30 return policy on the Seven.

Really great sounding Rhodes and Wurlitzer, the AP was also Ok.

FX’s was fine, but the illuminated encoders a bit to annoying, don’t think I would like them on a dark scene. It should have been possible to reduce the strenght of the lights, same go for the indicator lights for the presets.

The legs felt a little bit wobbly.

Other than that, loved the shape and look of piano, but the lid and tolex wannabe is just for the look. A gig bag is needed if you wanna take it out, and for that I think I would have left the lid at home to save weight.

But it was the sluggish action that put me off.
Even my NS with the HP keys feels more snappy.

 

On the Legend, if they could upgrade the Wurlitzer sound a little bit, it would be so much better. It sounds somewhat like a clarinet.

And for some reason, the pitch bend do not work on the Clavinet module, so no Lachy Doley style 😎

[Al Coda]

1 hour ago, bjosko said:

On the Legend, if they could upgrade the Wurlitzer sound a little bit, it would be so much better. It sounds somewhat like a clarinet.

And for some reason, the pitch bend do not work on the Clavinet module, so no Lachy Doley style

 

Great and rare info, thx !

Today, no PB on clavinet is a dealbreaker for me and in a DP.

I really wonder why in the world manufacturers make such, nowhere mentioned, mistakes.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[bjosko]

2 minutes ago, Al Coda said:

 

Great and rare info, thx !

Today, no PB on clavinet is a dealbreaker for me and in a DP.

I really wonder why in the world manufacturers make such, nowhere mentioned, mistakes.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

Actually I think it is a design fault.

The PB works on all the other modules, and also on the clavinet in the sound module, but not in the clavinet module itself.

How many are using PB on a acoustic piano ?  

[Al Coda]

8 minutes ago, bjosko said:

How many are using PB on a acoustic piano ?  

 

IMO, that´s a obsolete question.

Joe Zawinul w/ Weather Report and Syndicate did w/ his KORG M1 p.ex..

Not the best sample, but it was a sample of acoustic piano.

So,- WHEN instruments offer pitchbend at all,- it should be possible using it everywhere across the sound palette.

Same rules for all the other MIDI CCs and FX (see Kurzweil).

It´s not up to the manufacturer to decide what musicians need or not.

WE decide !

And what "the most" need, was unimportant always.

Who, when being creative, wants to sound like "all the other"?

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[bjosko]

7 minutes ago, Al Coda said:

 

IMO, that´s a obsolete question.

Joe Zawinul w/ Weather Report and Syndicate did w/ his KORG M1 p.ex..

Not the best sample, but it was a sample of acoustic piano.

So,- WHEN instruments offer pitchbend at all,- it should be possible using it everywhere across the sound palette.

Same rules for all the other MIDI CCs and FX (see Kurzweil).

It´s not up to the manufacturer to decide what musicians need or not.

WE decide !

And what "the most" need, was unimportant always.

Who, when being creative, wants to sound like "all the other"?

 

☺️

 

A.C.

Not to disagree with you, but just my example what they had done. Therefore I think it was a design ups or a fw error that they left it out from the clavinet module, not because they wanted it to be authentic. All modules play over the whole keyboard opposite Seven where the keyrange is similare to the simulated sound. Even it is correct, it is a bit annoying to hit a silent key because it is below f.ex the Wurlitzers original range.

[Al Coda]

5 minutes ago, bjosko said:

Not to disagree with you, but just my example what they had done. Therefore I think it was a design ups or a fw error that they left it out from the clavinet module, not because they wanted it to be authentic. All modules play over the whole keyboard opposite Seven where the keyrange is similare to the simulated sound. Even it is correct, it is a bit annoying to hit a silent key because it is below f.ex the Wurlitzers original range.

 

Yes, I understood and a fix by firmware update would be welcome,- if possible.

And I agree 100% on the keyrange thingy too.

 

But, you know,- they have their beta testers and other employees controlling everything before release and no one cares for these mistakes, design flaws,- or call it whatever you like.

These people are (hopefully) musicians !

I often have the impression they focus on "piano" only.

It´s like in the early 90s when, from the perspective of the manufacturer or their marketing team, every synth had to have a "good" piano patch.

And what crap that was !

 

Like in the past, these toys cost thousands of bucks and when I buy something, I don´t have any interest waiting for all the updates promised,- especially not in my age.

I´m not in the 20s anymore.

And the Viscount Legend 70s already HAS a big design flaw,- the 2 wheels to the left and their arrangement.

Which idot thought that would be a great idea ?

It´s close to the stupidity we found in other keyboards w/ only ONE wheel,- a Mod-Wheel ...

 

On the Legend 70s,- when the instrument were a bit wider,- the wheels were arranged as they should and we were possibly able to get the synth-module into the 88 version as well,- all together w/ the other existing modules incl. the ext. MIDI module.

OTOH, I didn´t understand why the ext.- MIDI functionalty required an individual module at all.

IMO this functionality belongs to a/ the master module anyway.

I also don´t understand why designers create an electronic keyboard instrument for that price and w/o external MIDI-Out control,- just try to sell that as an option.

To me, that´s unbounded cheek.

You know, there´s now a keyboard w/ a great array of front panel controls and a flat top, inviting you to put another instrument or Midi-modules on top,- and then you have to buy a MIDI-Out module.

And when you got all the other modules (except synth) before, you don´t get the MIDI-Out in or have to swap something out for it.

I don´t get that,- it´s insane "modularity",- at least for me.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[Brad Kaenel]

45 minutes ago, Al Coda said:

a great array of front panel controls and a flat top, inviting you to put another instrument or Midi-modules on top,- and then you have to buy a MIDI-Out module.

This is not strictly true.  All of the MIDI master controller features are available to you to make presets, whether or not you have the physical MIDI expansion board.  The only thing the physical board adds is a set of knobs for making *real-time* changes.  If all you want to do is call-up a preset you've made, and play it, then the MIDI module is unnecessary.  I did not buy it because I don't need it -- the built-in control panel and the Editor software is fine for me because I would never change a MIDI preset live "on-the-fly".

 

As to the vertical arrangement of the wheels, again I would defend their choice as a good one.  True, it's different from what you usually see, but I don't find it unnatural to use, and I appreciate the more compact use of space.

[francesco verni]

Dear Al,

 

you are right when you say that the instruments are made for musicians. But please, you have to consider that every company needs compromises. 

Someone loves the wheels in that position. It is not an error, it's a compromise.

However I really appreciate to read the "flaws"... the best way to solve them and make Viscount better and better.

9 hours ago, Al Coda said:

 

Yes, I understood and a fix by firmware update would be welcome,- if possible.

And I agree 100% on the keyrange thingy too.

 

But, you know,- they have their beta testers and other employees controlling everything before release and no one cares for these mistakes, design flaws,- or call it whatever you like.

These people are (hopefully) musicians !

I often have the impression they focus on "piano" only.

It´s like in the early 90s when, from the perspective of the manufacturer or their marketing team, every synth had to have a "good" piano patch.

And what crap that was !

 

Like in the past, these toys cost thousands of bucks and when I buy something, I don´t have any interest waiting for all the updates promised,- especially not in my age.

I´m not in the 20s anymore.

And the Viscount Legend 70s already HAS a big design flaw,- the 2 wheels to the left and their arrangement.

Which idot thought that would be a great idea ?

It´s close to the stupidity we found in other keyboards w/ only ONE wheel,- a Mod-Wheel ...

 

On the Legend 70s,- when the instrument were a bit wider,- the wheels were arranged as they should and we were possibly able to get the synth-module into the 88 version as well,- all together w/ the other existing modules incl. the ext. MIDI module.

OTOH, I didn´t understand why the ext.- MIDI functionalty required an individual module at all.

IMO this functionality belongs to a/ the master module anyway.

I also don´t understand why designers create an electronic keyboard instrument for that price and w/o external MIDI-Out control,- just try to sell that as an option.

To me, that´s unbounded cheek.

You know, there´s now a keyboard w/ a great array of front panel controls and a flat top, inviting you to put another instrument or Midi-modules on top,- and then you have to buy a MIDI-Out module.

And when you got all the other modules (except synth) before, you don´t get the MIDI-Out in or have to swap something out for it.

I don´t get that,- it´s insane "modularity",- at least for me.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

Dear Al, 

 

actually the big design flaw ( wheels positioning) is called compromise. And I ensure you that many good players loves them at the end, grabbing their keyboard while playing.

 

However, thanks for the suggestions.... fixing and getting better is one of the key of modularity... 😁

[AnotherScott]

11 hours ago, Brad Kaenel said:

As to the vertical arrangement of the wheels, again I would defend their choice as a good one.  True, it's different from what you usually see, but I don't find it unnatural to use, and I appreciate the more compact use of space.

 

I would defend this choice as well. As has been said, this allows for a more compact size (which also means lower travel weight, btw), and for grabbing the board while using, but also, two other points...

 

... it's not like there's any standard for these things in the first place. Korgs often have joysticks, Rolands often have their dual function lever, Yamaha YC/CP and Numa X have their sticks, so it's not like there's anything close to a standard "correct" way to implement pitch/mod controls... and personally I would take the Viscount approach over ANY of those alternatives. And I also recognize, that there are others here who would not, who actually prefer joysticks over wheels, etc. There is no right answer here. If someone doesn't like it, that's fine, but it just means they don't like it, it doesn't mean it was a mistake.

 

...lots of competitive boards have no pitch/mod controls whatsoever... what I would consider direct competitors like Korg SV2, Nord Piano, Crumar Seven, and then other boards that are close competitors, like Roland FP90, Yamaha P515, Kawai ES920, which although marketed with more of a home piano emphasis (largely for their speakers), are still marketed  for stage use as well.

[Al Coda]

2 hours ago, francesco verni said:

the big design flaw ( wheels positioning) is called compromise

 

 

Yes, and I hate compromizes !

What do you win ? 1-2 inches width ?

 

And to all the other,-

 

I simply prefer the wheel arrangement like I know it from Minimoog D and p.ex. Kurzweil over anything else and even y´all don´t care about.

You won´t convince me w/ "compromizes" when I have to pay EUR 2.999,- for the "Artist W EX" and then have to decide which module to swap out for the synth module p.ex..

I´m pretty sure there´s enough room inside the Legend 70s case to place additional modules in there,- in theory.

Then, additional modules could share (some unified) controls on the frontpanel.

But they didn´t had that in mind and now it is like it is because such possibility is hardware (mainboard) dependend.

 

I don´t buy when it´s not perfect for me.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[Al Coda]

12 hours ago, Brad Kaenel said:

All of the MIDI master controller features are available to you to make presets, whether or not you have the physical MIDI expansion board.  The only thing the physical board adds is a set of knobs for making *real-time* changes.  If all you want to do is call-up a preset you've made, and play it, then the MIDI module is unnecessary.  I did not buy it because I don't need it -- the built-in control panel and the Editor software is fine for me because I would never change a MIDI preset live "on-the-fly".

 

You mean what ?

A MIDI setup preset you program by using the software editor,- or the front panel, or both ?

Is it global or is it per patch ?

When it is per patch,- is the TX MIDI channel user programmable per patch ?

 

Up to now, I thought the "external MIdi module" adresses everything for more flexible outgoing Midi.

No ?

 

12 hours ago, Brad Kaenel said:

I would never change a MIDI preset live "on-the-fly"

 

Ehmmm ... you never swap MIDI channels, send different program changes, controller offsets and use different splitpoints and velocity curves per patch and for outgoing Midi ?

That has nothing to do w/ "on the fly",- but that´s what I always did between songs,- transmitting a set of MIDI info to other connected keys, modules, ext. FX etc..

 

I used an advanced MIDI processor in the past, but today it´s a good idea to have all built in already

You know,- Viscount has the technology in perfection from K4 / K5 masterkeyboard and now ??? 

 

A.C.

 

 

[Brad Kaenel]

6 hours ago, Al Coda said:

A MIDI setup preset you program by using the software editor,- or the front panel, or both ?

Is it global or is it per patch ?

When it is per patch,- is the TX MIDI channel user programmable per patch ?

Per PRESET, all of the MIDI info that you would like to be transmitted can be specified: Channel, Bank (MSB/LSB), Patch, etc. -- all of the external commands you would need, even including new configuration for pedals, mod controllers, etc.  This can be setup from the onboard menu, or the Editor app, or the External MIDI Module (if present). In fact, the Module itself is actually limited in configuration -- to setup everything that's possible, you must use the built-in panel/menu functions, or the Editor.

 

I will quote here from the user manual:

 

EXTERNAL module
The EXTERNAL module allows real-time control of external MIDI devices connected to the instrument through the MIDI or USB [TO HOST] connectors. Like the sound  generation modules, it can be activated / deactivated and assigned to keyboard parts. This module allows an easy access to the advanced master keyboard functions of the instrument. The module is comprised of two different, independent parts, that can be recalled by pressing two buttons on the panel. These two parts can both be active at the same time and can be combined in layer or split modes. Panel controls are further expanded by many other parameters that can be modified through the EDIT PROGRAM menu (see External section, page 49) and through the Legend ‟70s Editor App.

 

Whether the module is present or not, all master keyboard functions of the instrument are still available, since the External function is an integral part of Legend '70s. Without the dedicated module, all the functions connected to the control of external devices can be accessed through the EDIT PROGRAM menu.

 

[italics mine]

 

 

[Brad Kaenel]

6 hours ago, Al Coda said:

Ehmmm ... you never swap MIDI channels, send different program changes, controller offsets and use different splitpoints and velocity curves per patch and for outgoing Midi ?

That has nothing to do w/ "on the fly",- but that´s what I always did between songs,- transmitting a set of MIDI info to other connected keys, modules, ext. FX etc..

 

Of course, I do change PRESETS between songs.  What I meant was that I never edit a preset's configuration on-the-fly (change the MIDI channel, patch ID, etc.) Setting/changing those configuration values is what the Module is for.  It has no user-interface for selecting presets -- only for editing them.  And all of that editing may be accomplished without the Module -- it's just a bit more fiddly, as thus not as fast, doing it thru the onboard menus.

[Al Coda]

Brad,- thx a lot for all the excellent info.

I obviously misunderstood what the external midi module does,- in fact I had the impression it´s urgently needed to have outgoing MIDI under control.

Well,- who´s reading all the manuals of every new instrument being introduced?

I sometimes do, but not always.

My fault in this case.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[Brad Kaenel]

No worries, A.C -- that's what the KC forum is for!  For the record, I had the same misimpression until I read the docs. 🙃