Yamaha CK61 and CK88

[HSS]

A little bit OT: The CK's can apparently implement three zones with two separate split points.   After quickly going through Roland RD88's manual it appeared to me that, although it can also implement three zones, it was limited to one split point.  Does anyone know if I'm correct about this?

[AnotherScott]

 

 

On 3/31/2023 at 9:52 AM, JFN said:

Very true, and the reason the first thing I did with my MODX+ was load the Neo Soul Rhodes library. Problem solved.

 

Purgatory Creek would be another nice way to go. 

[roygBiv]

Hi Guys

 

I've been seriously contemplating buying a CK61, and have followed this thread with interest (thanks!)

 

But, I have been wondering if the Ck61 has  a simple way to "tap tempo", especially for delays.

 

Sounds like a simple request, but surprisingly, some synths do not have that ability (my Roland VR09 does, and it is great for setting tap-tempo delays on the fly for dub style effects, etc.).

 

Anyway, was intrigued to find  (somewhat obscured in the manual on page 17) the Yamaha CK61 can do tempo delay.

 

HOWEVER, it is not clear from the wording they use if you can actually "tap" the tempo, or you just "tap" the   [ENTER] button to gain access to change the tempo using a knob (which would be kinda lame).

 

Anybody know?

here's a link to the manual:

https://usa.yamaha.com/files/download/other_assets/2/1547682/ck88_en_om_b0.pdf

 

-------[From the manual, page 17]--------------------

Tempo Delay
A special delay that syncs to the tempo of the song.
The delay is applied by specifying the Tempo (Tempo
Delay Time) and the note length.
The initial value is 1/4 (quarter note).

Use the [DEPTH] knob to change the delay depth
and feedback level, and the [TIME] knob to adjust
the delay tempo.

Another intuitive way of setting the tempo is to tap
the [ENTER] button at least three times.

 

Tempo Delay Time can be set by using the [TIME]
knob while holding down the [ENTER] button
(page 42), or from the [SETTINGS] button  Sound
 Common  Tempo Delay Time.

[AnotherScott]

7 minutes ago, roygBiv said:

HOWEVER, it is not clear from the wording they use if you can actually "tap" the tempo, or you just "tap" the   [ENTER] button to gain access to change the tempo using a knob (which would be kinda lame).

 

Based on  the instruction that you can tap three times, that sounds like you're tapping the tempo:

 

7 minutes ago, roygBiv said:

-------[From the manual, page 17]--------------------

...

Another intuitive way of setting the tempo is to tap
the [ENTER] button at least three times.

 

[Sam Mullins]

8 hours ago, EB5AGV said:

 

As other have said, and is also my experience, the GHS is not the same (or at least feels not the same) in all its incarnations. I had a DGX660 for a couple years (replaced it with an acoustic) and quite liked its action. So I guess you will need to play it to decide!

 

Jose

Just went and played two more GHS models. DGX670 which was similar to P45 (shallow travel, hard bottom but not bad).  P125 which was fine; if the CK88 is like that, I’m in. If it’s like the MX88 I played, it’s a no go.

[Ibarch]

2 hours ago, HSS said:

A little bit OT: The CK's can apparently implement three zones with two separate split points.   After quickly going through Roland RD88's manual it appeared to me that, although it can also implement three zones, it was limited to one split point.  Does anyone know if I'm correct about this?

 

Yes and no. It only allows one split if you use the split button. Upper 1 and 2 are always on the top part. 

 

However you can program the key range for each zone separately and save to the scene. Each zone can be any location you want on the keyboard. 

Works great - unless you touch the split or dual buttons at which point it throws the scene settings for all 3 zones out the window and reverts back to the single split point. You have to reload the scene to restore the pre programmed ranges. 

 

This is very irritating and means most of the time I can't use the split/dual buttons in live performance. Have to resort to switching volumes of zones on off via expression pedals or the volume pots for each zone. 

[HSS]

2 hours ago, Ibarch said:

 

Yes and no. It only allows one split if you use the split button. Upper 1 and 2 are always on the top part. 

 

However you can program the key range for each zone separately and save to the scene. Each zone can be any location you want on the keyboard. 

Works great - unless you touch the split or dual buttons at which point it throws the scene settings for all 3 zones out the window and reverts back to the single split point. You have to reload the scene to restore the pre programmed ranges. 

 

This is very irritating and means most of the time I can't use the split/dual buttons in live performance. Have to resort to switching volumes of zones on off via expression pedals or the volume pots for each zone. 

Thanks for the info.  That's good that more than one split point can be programmed into the RD88 and saved to a scene.  Perhaps a software update could fix the issue with the split / dual buttons overriding the splits in the scene.   But given that the RD88 has been around for a few years, Roland may not be prone to do more updates. 

 

Having said this, the RD88 is a couple hundred bucks cheaper than the CK88 and is thus an attractive option for me, especially given that I'm notoriously cheap and the two boards are comparable in many ways.  FWIW... The dedicated organ section on the CK, although a nice feature, is not critical to me because, if necessary, I can cover B3 with my Hammond SK1 or Nord 5d (or with IOS VB3m). Besides, I hate trying to do B3 licks on weighted keys. 

[Fleer]

On 3/31/2023 at 1:01 AM, Tommy OnIt said:

I don’t love my RD88. In fact I bought one. Returned it. Then ended up buying another. It’s light and decent. But the programming sucks. The knobs should be continuous rotary encoder.

In between I had a used Yamaha CP4 from Guitar Center for 44 days. Loved it. But it was heavy to carry to gigs and practice. And right before the return period ended, it developed a squeaky key. So I returned it and bought another RD.

Does the job. MIDI connectivity indeed sucks. No rotary controller for data entry. It’s tedious to program. And the way the EQ is set up globally really is a downer.

As far as trading. Nope, I’ll likely keep the RD even if I buy the CK.

My biggest concern now, is if I will like the GHS action.

The RD88 rocks for me. Don’t mind the on-keyboard programming as there’s Zenology Pro to make all kinds of new sounds and download them to the RD. And then there’s that perfect MainStage compatibility. It’s a mighty setup. 

[Tommy OnIt]

21 hours ago, HSS said:

After quickly going through Roland RD88's manual it appeared to me that, although it can also implement three zones, it was limited to one split point.  Does anyone know if I'm correct about this?

You can edit the key range of each of the parts, effectively creating 2 split points. Also the lower can be at the high end of the keyboard and visa versa. They can also overlap. after you set it up I think once you hit the split button it will throw this all out of whack. As I said the programming on a RD88 is tedious. It’s what makes the CK so appealing. 
only reason i bought it (twice) is because nothing else fit the price/weight/feature balance. 
CK may do just that. Plus with batteries. Hopefully the speakers are louder than the RD. They are usable only in a quiet area. 
 

[Tommy OnIt]

12 hours ago, Fleer said:

The RD88 rocks for me.

Excellent. I’m glad it’s great for you.
I’ve never used any computer when performing. Perhaps I should investigate it. 
I only have an iPad and a cheap laptop so I don’t think those are an option.

[AnotherScott]

3 hours ago, Tommy OnIt said:

As I said the programming on a RD88 is tedious. It’s what makes the CK so appealing. 
only reason i bought it (twice) is because nothing else fit the price/weight/feature balance. 

allan_evett bought it twice as well, IIRC. It seems they got a lot right and a lot wrong, huh?

 

The board that I always felt was most competitive to the RD88 was the Casio PX560.  What I had posted elsewhere:

 

Quote

The Roland has much better MIDI controller functionality, and when it comes to splits/layers, you can put independent insert effects on three parts (vs. only one part being able to have its own effects on the Casio), and it includes better analog-style synth capability (PX-560 lacks even a monophonic synth mode). Casio advantages include more split/layer parts (4--which can even be extended to 24 with hexlayers--whereas Roland maxes at 3), full on-board sound editing, touchscreen interface, and built-in sequencer. Sonically, I'd give Roland the edge (esp. with its zencore expansion abilities), though there are exceptions, i.e. I think Casio is stronger on the EPs (including some other ones they make available for free download). Action is probably a matter of personal preference.

 

I also hadn't noted there that the Roland lacks a 5-pin MIDI In, which the Casio has; and that the Casio has arranger-style functions, like accompaniment patterns and drum rhythms with quick access to intro/fill/end patterns. Also, as an extension of the sequencer function, Casio is 16-part multitimbral when driven externally (e.g. you could drive other sounds from an external board... which is also someplace its 5-pin MIDI In would come into play.) And the Roland has a mic input which the Casio does not.

 

Bringing CK88 into that comparison...

 

Splits/layers and Integration of external sources: RD88 has 3 zones total (one split point), any of which can be internal or external over MIDI, each zone with a dedicated volume control. CK has 3 internal zones (two split points) plus 4 external MIDI zones (each with fully independent key ranges), but the external zones seem to have no front panel volume controls  (just a rear panel master level for the external zones as a whole). Casio has 4 internal zones (one split point), though you can use hexlayers so that a single sound can have its own savable/recallable 6-way split within a single zone. Casio has no external zones, though since the 4 internal zones each transmit on a different MIDI channel, you can "fake" some amount of external control. All 3 have MIDI over USB and 5-pin, except Roland lacks 5pin In. All 3 have audio line in, Roland also has audio in over USB from Mac/PC, Yamaha adds iOS support there (and I think Android). Roland has specific support for Mainstage. Yamaha and Roland have mic inputs.

 

Insert effects: Roland has single insert effects on each of its 3 parts. (I don't know whether they can be applied to external sounds?) Yamaha has two insert effects available for each of its 3 internal parts (and some ability to apply insert effects to external sounds). Casio has insert effect on one internal sound. 

 

Editing of individual sounds: Casio tones have a good amount of editability on-board. Roland and Yamaha have a small number of (for example) filter/envelope modifications that can be stored/recalled, but deeper tone editing on the Roland requires Zenology (cloud), and isn't available at all on Yamaha.

 

Rhythm/accompaniment/sequencing: Casio has extensive capabilities here. Roland has some basic drum patterns. Yamaha has none of this built-in, their solution is to use the top or bottom key to trigger a backing track from a USB stick, which seems kind of weird to me. Like, they decided to add this capability after it was too late to put one more button on the control surface.

 

Control: Yamaha has 9-slider organ emulation, and fully dedicated hard controls for most functions. Casio has touchscreen, some dedicated controls (particularly for drum/accompaniment/recording functions), and 3 definable knobs. Roland seems more menu navigation based? For individual sound navigation, Casio's touchscreen is probably strongest, but for navigating your favorites and saved combinations of split/layered sounds (i.e. Yamaha Live Sets, Roland Scenes, Casio Registrations) Casio is probably weakest because they are listed with numbers (not names), so you'd need a cheat sheet. (Kind of a waste of a potential big benefit of the touchscreen there.) At least there's plenty of space for it. RD88 gives you buttons for 10 sets of 10 Favorite scenes (so 100, though 400 Scenes are available in total), Yamaha gives you buttons for 20 sets of 8 Live Sets (160 total), Casio gives you buttons for 24 sets of 4 Registrations (96 total).

 

I'm sure I've missed some important distinctions there. :-) But that's what I see as a brief overview, anyway. I've used the PX560, obviously not yet a CK, but also never an RD88, so especially if I missed something you think is particularly relevant about the RD88 (pro or con), by all means, chime in...

 

 

 

 

 

[HSS]

2 hours ago, Tommy OnIt said:

You can edit the key range of each of the parts, effectively creating 2 split points. Also the lower can be at the high end of the keyboard and visa versa. They can also overlap. after you set it up I think once you hit the split button it will throw this all out of whack. As I said the programming on a RD88 is tedious. It’s what makes the CK so appealing. 
only reason i bought it (twice) is because nothing else fit the price/weight/feature balance. 
CK may do just that. Plus with batteries. Hopefully the speakers are louder than the RD. They are usable only in a quiet area. 
 

Thanks for the info about the RD88's splitting capabilities. 

 

The onboard speakers for the RD88 and CK88  are both rated at 6 watts per side.  FWIW the RD 88 appears to win on specs alone with two 4.7" woofers and two .78" tweeters, while the CK88 apparently only has two full-range 4.72" speakers. 

 

Of course, a lot depends on how the speakers are configured and their sound dispersion both for the player and a potential small "audience".  

 

Based on the specs alone, the onboard speakers in the Yamaha P121 (and P125), which I have, appears to be better / louder than both the CK88 and RD88, being rated at 7 watts per side with two 4.7" woofers and two 1.5" tweeters.

 

Having said this, manufacturer specs often end up being meaningless in the real world.  

[AnotherScott]

20 minutes ago, HSS said:

Having said this, manufacturer specs often end up being meaningless in the real world.  

 

Yes, and especially when it comes to speaker wattage!

[Tommy OnIt]

2 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

4 hours ago, Tommy OnIt said:

 

allan_evett bought it twice as well, IIRC. It seems they got a lot right and a lot wrong, huh?

Yes. You nailed it. 
Someone said it may be a good time to pick up a used RD with this Yamaha coming out. At first I did agree but if CK88 this is the same keyboard action as in the MODX 88, then I withdraw that opinion.

I just played 3 MODXs at Guitar Center. 1 new, 2 used. 

For now I’ll work with my RD LOL. 
They all felt cheesy. The used ones were 2 different prices. Cheaper one was worse. (OK I didn’t actually “play“ them as there was no volume. One of them was turned off completely. But I didn’t need to play them. They felt terrible.)

I’ve lost interest in the CK88. 
☹️

 

[AnotherScott]

14 minutes ago, Tommy OnIt said:

I just played 3 MODXs at Guitar Center. 1 new, 2 used. 

For now I’ll work with my RD LOL. 
They all felt cheesy. The used ones were 2 different prices. Cheaper one was worse. (OK I didn’t actually “play“ them as there was no volume. One of them was turned off completely. But I didn’t need to play them. They felt terrible.)

I’ve lost interest in the CK88. 

 

When the MODX first came out, I was considering which size to buy, even thinking about the possibility of buying hammer and non-hammer versions, but I played the MODX8 at GC and decided there that I wouldn't be buying that (and happily bought a MODX7). But on that same GC visit, I played a DGX660 which is also GHS, and I wished the MODX had felt like that, then I could have been happy with a MODX8! So I'm definitely not shutting the door on a CK88, because I know it is possible for me to be happy with a GHS action, though I don't know what makes one better than another.

 

But you really should try boards with the sound on... sometimes the right programming can make a big difference. I thought I would hate the Roland FP4 when I played it with the sound off, but it actually ended up being a nice board to play. Go figure.

[GeorgeRaindog]

I dont think it has been posted before, here are some very good CK61 demos 

(4 videos in total, including an "All 363 Sounds" video and a "first impressions" with english subs)

 

 

 

 

 

[AnotherScott]

From that last video, there's one more pretty big difference between this and the YC/CP big brothers... This board does not have entirely seamless transitions between Live Sets, you can get effects glitches, whereas they are fully seamless on the YC/CP (e.g., you can be sustaining a piano sound, switch to a chorused Rhodes sound, and not have the chorus suddenly applied to the previously sustained piano sound).

[ElmerJFudd]

2 hours ago, AnotherScott said:

From that last video, there's one more pretty big difference between this and the YC/CP big brothers... This board does not have entirely seamless transitions between Live Sets, you can get effects glitches, whereas they are fully seamless on the YC/CP (e.g., you can be sustaining a piano sound, switch to a chorused Rhodes sound, and not have the chorus suddenly applied to the previously sustained piano sound).

How does that compare to the similar concept boards it competes with in the price range?  

[AnotherScott]

42 minutes ago, ElmerJFudd said:

How does that compare to the similar concept boards it competes with in the price range?  

 

Seamless transition between multi-sound combinations without glitches in effects...  IIRC: Yamaha does it in YC, CP, and MODX/+/Montage. Korg does (or did) it in Nautilus, Kronos, Vox Continental, Grandstage, SV2, PA5x. Roland does it in Fantom/Fantom-0, maybe others? Nord does it in Electro 6, Stage 3 and Stage 4. I think all the Dexibells do it. Whether any of those compete with the CK in concept+price is questionable.

 

[AnotherScott]

Dexibell actually seems to have the best implementation of this. AFAIK, on all the Korg/Roland/Yamaha/Nord implementations of this, you can only do a single patch change without a drop out. If you try to hold a note through a second patch change on any of those boards I mentioned, the oldest patch drops out. Dexibell is the only exception I know of. (See video below.)

 

There are, however, numerous other boards that allows you to hold sound through multiple patch changes without dropouts, but you may hear effects glitches (numerous Kurzweil and Casio models come to mind, as does Roland Juno DS). It is the combination of maintaining effects AND supporting holding notes through multiple transitions that, AFAIK, is unique to Dexibell.

 

 

[AnotherScott]

I had mentioned earlier that I liked how close to the keys the most essential controls were, which might let me employ my old Vox Continental trick of leaving most controls covered during live performance (using them for pre-gig sound setup, but allowing a board above to cover most of them during performance so as to keep the 2 sets of keys close together and the overall footprint minimal). Though it turns out that, on the CK, the 88 (which I would generally prefer as a bottom board) is not as amenable to this as the 61, based on this side-by-side graphic. I couldn't get the sizes to line up perfectly, but it's pretty close:

 

[AnotherScott]

After commenting above about how to make a CK a "shallow" bottom board, I realized that actually might work well on the YC. So if you're curious, I discussed that at https://forums.musicplayer.com/topic/178284-yamaha-yc88-and-yc73/page/5/#comment-2944553 figuring it would make more sense in a YC thread and be a bit of a derail for this one.

 

Back to something else...

 

On 3/31/2023 at 1:35 AM, 1203 said:

From what i‘ve heard from the demos, i‘m absolutely sure that the CK Rhodes are from the YC/CP, at least the great ist „RD78“ sample is in the CK. 

 

I've been going back and forth about this. I've heard what seem like could be some nice Rhodes demos, but a surprisingly number of bad ones. I really do want to see what these are like when played on person. Sometimes even a "good" demo of a sound is only that good because, whether by accident or by design, the player avoided playing in a way that really showed its shortcomings.

 

Looking at the demos posted in this thread...

 

In the first video of the thread, at https://forums.musicplayer.com/topic/183138-yamaha-ck61-and-ck88/page/3/#comment-2940847 - we have the opening (with backing) and 11:05 (solo) - with a terrible overdrive (sounds like it's being played through a blown speaker), and what seems to me like an unnaturally exaggerated amount of dynamics (i.e. the quiets are too soft relative to the loud stuff... unrealistically so, to my ears, though it's been a long time since I've played the real thing), and to me, the quiet Rhodes sound just sounds "off." Exaggerated range and unnaturalness of the quiet timbre are problems that recur in many of the other demos.

 

Next we have the one at  https://forums.musicplayer.com/topic/183138-yamaha-ck61-and-ck88/page/3/#comment-2940942 at 13 minutes in, promising.

 

Then we have https://forums.musicplayer.com/topic/183138-yamaha-ck61-and-ck88/page/6/#comments at 1:55, this one's also okay.

 

 

The next one, at https://forums.musicplayer.com/topic/183138-yamaha-ck61-and-ck88/page/4/#comment-2941012 at 16:47 - same problems as first one (and same player), though not distorted this time.

 

The one at https://forums.musicplayer.com/topic/183138-yamaha-ck61-and-ck88/page/7/#comment-2941482 at 3:00, another one that seems okay.

 

Then there's the one I posted at https://forums.musicplayer.com/topic/183138-yamaha-ck61-and-ck88/page/7/#comment-2941927 - two samples starting at 1:36, which I really dislike. It's all quiet stuff, fine, but they sound almost more like a DX7 than a Rhodes.

 

And here we are back with I think the third demo with the same demonstrator at https://forums.musicplayer.com/topic/183138-yamaha-ck61-and-ck88/page/9/#comment-2942715 at 7:20, this time with a 61 instead of an 88, but same issues again (sans distortion)... I guess these are his sounds and how he demoes them.

 

The "All 363 sound" video (cool!) at https://forums.musicplayer.com/topic/183138-yamaha-ck61-and-ck88/page/10/#comment-2944175 - again two samples, starting at 4:47 and again, sounding more like a DX7, yecch. But again, it's the same player as the other video that elicited this reaction from me. 

 

From those, I'd say my impression is I might be okay with it when pushing it, but am suspicious of its gentle side. But that still leaves me wondering, are these indeed the same as their like-named sample sets on the YC, or not? The pre-programmed YC Live Set 78 EP definitely sounds better, at least because they employ the compression effect. But even turning off the effect, I can't get it to sound as bad (or should I say, "as subjectively unpleasant to my ears") as the worst of the CK examples. Maybe it's some combination of my playing technique (which tends toward the heavy) and my velocity curve settings, I did not experiment extensively. Until I get my fingers on them, hopefully side-by-side and maybe with some tweaking, I'm not quite ready to say I will or will not find these as satisfying as what's on the YC. At least if I get them side=by-side, I'll have a target to try to tweak the CK to if indeed I don't find that sound right away, it's always easier to tweak to a target than in the abstract. So I look forward to seeing how that goes.

 

And I found some other EP demos that have not yet been posted here, which I'll post without comment, since you may be hearing these for the first time:

 

(from start)

 

(at 3:48)

 

(2:45)

 

[JohnH]

On 3/15/2023 at 10:45 AM, ewall08530 said:

I’ve looked over the manual but can’t determine if it’s possible to hard pan the left/right outputs and have all the organs coming out one side into my Ventilator.  

 

Panning just got added in the latest os update and includes organs. https://usa.yamaha.com/files/download/other_assets/9/1382649/yc88_yc73_yc61_en_sm_c0.pdf

[AnotherScott]

30 minutes ago, JohnH said:

 

Panning just got added in the latest os update and includes organs. https://usa.yamaha.com/files/download/other_assets/9/1382649/yc88_yc73_yc61_en_sm_c0.pdf

 

Yes, added to the YC with today's update, but no update to the CK.

[JohnH]

thanks the search took me back to the wrong topic and I didn't check. Since the CK just came out there's no updates yet. So hopefully this gets added down the road too.

[LarsHarner2]

I found out shipping from my retailer starts in 2 weeks. As I am over 50 now, this will help me in terms of portabllilty

[Sam Mullins]

I see  Sweetwater, Kraft and Musician's Friend all have CK's in stock now.  So hopefully we will get some reports here

 

[HammondDave]

That front panel looks awfully reflective. I don’t like that too much. 

[ewall08530]

1 hour ago, Sam Mullins said:

I see  Sweetwater, Kraft and Musician's Friend all have CK's in stock now.  So hopefully we will get some reports here

 

My CK 61 gets delivered tomorrow.  I hope to make a few videos specifically on the organ section and a general review   That’s what I would be using it for 50% of the time.   

[Sam Mullins]

2 hours ago, ewall08530 said:

My CK 61 gets delivered tomorrow.  I hope to make a few videos specifically on the organ section and a general review   That’s what I would be using it for 50% of the time.   

Great...congrats.  Can you do me a favor and measure the octave width to see if Yamaha is still 3/16" narrower than most other manufacturers?