Real Rhodes vs Roland DS.

[Baldwin Funster]

Sorry, I'm always trying to defend  my DS as it seems to be ignored as a good board. Here's a comparison I found interesting. 

 

[David Emm]

Good one! Yes, the DS is a keeper. I LIKE Roland libraries with hardware wrapped around them. "Built like tanks" is often accurate.

 

There are numerous Rhodes purists about who decry simulations, but having played several (in good and bad shape) and owning a Wurly for 3 years, I feel good about the emulations. The one I have in Logic is my go-to, even when I need added grit to get it in the slot. Its sweet when I need it to be and barks well if I set a little distortion to trigger here and there. EPs are more effect-friendly than acoustic pianos, too. Its like having another great specialty synth.

 

Unless you are in an exposed setting where the feel is a more delicate issue for you, well, the synths I've played have generally given me very decent 'sweet' EP sounds overall, with the meatier tones requiring just a little added programming time. Its a vital yet basic sound that generally samples well, so its not a strain to any modern synth of merit. I find the "vs." in the title amusing. To my ear, as EPs, they're of essentially equal merit.

[miden]

Having owned a 73 stage flat-top (with the dyno kit) I can say that a lot are close, but imo, NONE can replace.

 

I reckon it is impossible to replicate that whole "infinite" variation available on the "real" thing.....

 

As an anecdotal thing only, I could sit at the 73 for literally hours and never get bored. Only had two pedals (OD and phaser).......when I sit at either a controller plus a vst, or hardware keyboard/synth, I can mebbe get half an hour before "meh!!" sets in

[bill5]

I have demo-ed the Juno DS 88 and really liked it. pffft on the Rhodes purists.   

[Baldwin Funster]

33 minutes ago, miden said:

Having owned a 73 stage flat-top (with the dyno kit) I can say that a lot are close, but imo, NONE can replace.

 

I reckon it is impossible to replicate that whole "infinite" variation available on the "real" thing.....

 

As an anecdotal thing only, I could sit at the 73 for literally hours and never get bored. Only had two pedals (OD and phaser).......when I sit at either a controller plus a vst, or hardware keyboard/synth, I can mebbe get half an hour before "meh!!" sets in

I think the point of the comparison in the video was that the DS was good enough to do a gig so you can leave the heavy, and easy to damage rhodes at home. The missing inspiration would come from playing songs with a live band, as well as the easier load in and load out. The reviewer never suggested that the rhodes could be discarded in favor of the DS.

[miden]

34 minutes ago, Jr. Deluxe said:

I think the point of the comparison in the video was that the DS was good enough to do a gig so you can leave the heavy, and easy to damage rhodes at home. The missing inspiration would come from playing songs with a live band, as well as the easier load in and load out. The reviewer never suggested that the rhodes could be discarded in favor of the DS.

 

haha fair enough - btw it was tough to damage them! Built like a tank!

[Adan]

I got along fine with the rhodes on my VR09 when I had it.  Didn't love the sound playing at home but on a gig it cut through the mix nicely.  It's the action on these lower end Rolands that leaves something to be desired.

 

I wouldn't worry about damaging a rhodes, I'd worry about my back.  Anymore, my body feels more like a teacup than a tank.

[ProfD]

While I'm a bit of Rhodes purist, I'll  also be the 1st person to admit that today's facsimiles are good enough to get through a gig. 

 

Having said that, I'm not a huge fan of the Rhodes sounds Roland produces.  I could make it work. 

 

Otherwise, my preference would be a Korg SV when it comes to a Rhodes facsimile.😎

[Delaware Dave]

 

One of the things that I do like about Crumar's attempt is that they strove for authenticity not only with the sound but with other smaller details (phasing as an example) so that when playing it really does trigger the hand to brain connection for me. Are they exact, no, but the vibe is definitely there when playing.

 

 

 

[AnotherScott]

23 hours ago, Jr. Deluxe said:

Sorry, I'm always trying to defend  my DS as it seems to be ignored as a good board. Here's a comparison I found interesting. 

To me, that video shows that the DS is pretty different sounding from that Rhodes! Though that difference can be more or less pronounced depending on where in the keyboard range you are playing and how hard you're hitting the keys.

 

I don't care for the board's EPs, but I do like the Juno DS a lot. I prefer it to the competitive Kross, for example. The Kross does have some significant functional advantages of its own (e.g. sequencer, MIDI, audio interface), but for my use, the functionality of the Roland is superior (things like patch remain, much better real-time split management for things like volume and octave switching, ability to load custom keyboard-playable samples). To put it differently, if I had to do a gig with JUST a Juno DS or JUST a Kross, the Roland would be my choice, because without a second board, the ability to change sounds relatively smoothly or to easily control two sounds in a split become particularly valuable. 

 

That said, I think the Kross EPs are better. And neither would by my first choice for EPs. In their price range, for an 88, if EP was my focus, I'd choose the Casio PX-5S... though Casio doesn't make a 61-key equivalent. (I have no real-world experience with the current 61-key Casios for comparison.) There are a number of other boards I like for EPs... but they are pricier.

[Docbop]

A real Rhodes has a warmth and soul no modeled Rhodes has.  Some sampled Rhodes come close.   The modeled Rhodes doe offer more options for creating your own Rhodes sound.     But if the question is model Rhodes versus real for gigging the modeled Rhodes is good choice.   Audiences don't care they just want to hear a sound that makes them remember the original tune or beat so they can dance.   Save your back and leave the vintage stuff at home or use it in a recording session and use the clone gear for gigging.    

[Mighty Motif Max]

Purgatory Creek's MKII Rhodes gets more than close enough to me - especially not having actually ever played a Rhodes in good shape. I am not a fan of the DS's sound there - it's in the ballpark, but the dynamics are too limited, it's too "perfect" of a sound, and I can hear sample stretch points I think that diminish the realism. Especially in the higher register.

[ABECK]

It's easy to forget that not all real Rhodes pianos sounded or felt particularly good.  I've played and owned real Rhodes that have  had shitty action and much to be desired in the sound department.  I'm not saying a good Rhodes is a unicorn, as there are many out there that are fantastic.  But they aren't all created equal for sure.  The Rhodes in my last studio session was mushy as all hell. 

[David Emm]

3 hours ago, ABECK said:

It's easy to forget that not all real Rhodes pianos sounded or felt particularly good.  I've played and owned real Rhodes that have  had shitty action and much to be desired in the sound department.  I'm not saying a good Rhodes is a unicorn, as there are many out there that are fantastic.  But they aren't all created equal for sure.  The Rhodes in my last studio session was mushy as all hell. 

 

Taking on a real Rhodes or Wurly also means taking on the job of maintaining them yourself, to some minor extent. Beyond that, its no easier to haul to a shop than to a gig. Most I've played were crying for a tune-up. A few were memorable cream puffs, so knowing that, I'll always defend the basics. EPs are a vital part of my voice and less so as a tool for ballads than as a left-field poly synth. Its an emotive little bit of magic.

 

Also, your avatar creeps me out. I hope that's painted on rather than being your birth appearance.