Tell the difference: Rhodes vs. Wurli

[Delaware Dave]

Surprisingly I was wrong 2 times after having owned both back in the day:

 

 

[bjosko]

They can sound pretty similar, but I guessed correctly each time, perhaps because I have owned both. Personally I prefer a Wurlitzer for sound, but not a real one. I have done my duty in replacing broken reeds …. Never broke a tine. 
There are something special with the sound of a Wurly, perhaps small imperfections in the tuning that give it a vibrato effect in the sound. The Rhodes sound more static. 

[eric]

Cool video and comparisons. I have spent a lot of time on both Rhodes and Wurly, though I don't currently own either (sad face). When I was in HS back in the early-mid '80s, the school had a Rhodes Stage that I used in the jazz band and for all the HS musicals. Somehow I convinced the band director and chorus teacher that it would be ok for me take the Rhodes home during summer break - I did this three summers and had the best time taking that Rhodes around to various garage band parties and jam sessions. Around the same time, I found a Wurly 200A in the closet at church (beige model) and no one wanted it. I was given permission to take it. So I used it as my rehearsal piano at my college apartment. I ended up selling it to a touring jam band for what I thought was a nice sum at the time. I still miss it and would love to get another Wurly one day. 

 

I was able to get pretty much all of the references in the video. I'm a bigger fan of the Wurly sound if I had to pick one. It's more rock and roll and is a sound I use pretty often when I'm playing a song with my band that doesn't really have a keyboard part. I can usually find a good part on my own somewhere between organ and Wurly.

[Docbop]

I missed two but both they track was used a Rhodes for a bass part and rolled the high end off.  I'm a fan of both but more a Rhodes fan.   Someone mentioned broken reed and never broken a tine.  Well as a roadie and then recording engineer seen broken tines just not as often.   The worst was I was working the sessions for believe or not  "Bill Cosby Really Sings" album.   Everyone had a great time laying down the tracks for this album.  Stu Gardner was the producer and keyboardist and two new cats trying to get into the studio scene Ray Parker Jr and Ollie Brown both had just quit Stevie Wonder's band.  Stu was breaking tines on the SIR Rhodes one day when laying down a really groovin' track Stu broke four or five tines on the Rhodes.   SIR was getting really sick of having to sent someone out to Sound City almost daily to replace tines. 

 

That album was a lot of fun to work on until the first day of Cosby coming in to do his vocals or better yet rappin'.    Cosby was like an hour late, then shows up in his tennis outfit and bitching what an inconvenience it is because he's has to play tennis in a little while.   Most arrogant celebrity dick I worked with in all my career around the big names.  Then the surprise to me Cosby had nothing prepared, Stu Gardner would tell Cosby thing like this song has a train sound and play the track for Cosby.    Cosby would listen say okay I got it and go out into the studio and off the top of his head come up with some really funny stuff that had all of us laughing in the studio. That is how every track done went down Cosby on the spot making up the lines.    So that was impressive even though he was a dick in every other way. 

[Old No7]

Deleted my original reply (which went off topic...)

 

But I enjoyed the video above and got 2 wrong.  Very interesting what was said about the Wurly being "more consistent" in tone and models (therefore playing), while the many iterations of the Rhodes meant there was a wide variety of sounds, keybeds, playability and felt, etc.

 

Old No7

[wineandkeyz]

I owned a Rhodes 88 back in the day and now have a Wurly. I went 8-2 on the first 10 samples (were there more?). I don't really prefer one over the other, it's more which one fits the tune better. Horses for courses, as it were.

[BenWaB3]

I was able to get them all. but for the ones who didn't, don't feel bad - it was a bit flawed in that either he played along with the track or did it on his own, which made it it sound a little different from the original, Dancing In the Moonlight being a prime example. Also, sometimes he didn't play the tracks long enough for them to reveal some of the Rhodes-iness or Wurli-ness of the instrument that were on the recordings.

[bill5]

The actual test starts at 1:10 for anyone wishing to skip the blahblahblah  

 

I aced it, not that that's anything great, but I think there's a definite difference (the first song's artist is in fact how I explain a wurli when people don't know what I mean...he kind of "owns" that sound IMO). 

 

[analogika]

That version of that second song is not by THAT artist — in fact, that particular version is a major part of the reason why I bought that particular piano. 

[Floyd Tatum]

The first "electrified" keyboard that I paid for with my own money was a Wurli, the second was a Rhodes.

 

Prior to that, the first electric keyboard I played was an Ace Tone Top 5 (transistor organ).  My friend's kinda-wealthy parents bought it for him, along with a Fender Bassman amp, and a Fender cabinet with four tens.  Or it might have been a Bassman combo with four tens.  That gift provided us the means to start a band.  I got to play loud electric organ, he got to play drums.  I learned how to play Light My Fire on it - probably wrong, who can remember - hormones were messing with my concentration, ya know?  Chris, where are you, man?  I'd love to share a beer or 24, and catch up.

 

I can't believe it, but I got two wrong (I expected to Ace it).   A couple guys have already admitted to the same thing, which softens the blow to my ego a bit.  Once folks have finished 'fessing up to their mistakes (c'mon guys, you don't have to pretend you got 'em all right 🙂), it would be fun to compare notes and see if we got the same two wrong.   I have some theories about why I (we) failed, which I'll save for later.

 

[MathOfInsects]

Mom was a professional musician and owned a series of cool-ass Rhodes when I was growing up. But my first non-piano keyboard was a Wurly. I'm not sure if it's related, but I still greatly prefer the Wurly and rarely use Rhodes, even on "Rhodes" tunes. There's something about the directness of the sound that I prefer. But sometimes (usually in a session) a song just wants Rhodes, and nothing else will do. 

[RABid]

I owned both i the early 80's, but not at the same time. Both failed my quest of getting a usable piano sound for covering Bob Segar.  I did have fun playing Supertranp on the Whurly.

[jerrythek]

3 hours ago, analogika said:

That version of that second song is not by THAT artist — in fact, that particular version is a major part of the reason why I bought that particular piano. 

Yeah, Donny Hathaway is one of the best motivators to get a Wurlie, for sure.

[jerrythek]

1 hour ago, Floyd Tatum said:

A couple guys have already admitted to the same thing, so I'm not quite so embarrassed.   Once people have finished owning up to their mistakes (c'mon guys, you don't have to pretend you got 'em all right 🙂), it would be fun to compare notes and see if we all got the same two wrong.   I have some theories about why we failed, but I'll save those for later.

I missed only 1, the Childish Gambino track.

[Floyd Tatum]

7 hours ago, MathOfInsects said:

Mom was a professional musician and owned a series of cool-ass Rhodes when I was growing up. But my first non-piano keyboard was a Wurly. I'm not sure if it's related, but I still greatly prefer the Wurly and rarely use Rhodes, even on "Rhodes" tunes. There's something about the directness of the sound that I prefer. But sometimes (usually in a session) a song just wants Rhodes, and nothing else will do. 

Each has its charms, for sure.   I really wish I could have have afforded to keep that Wurly, but at that time, I gladly sold it, then scraped all the money I had in the world together to buy the Rhodes, and didn't think twice about it.

I can't believe how differently I looked at the world then.  I had almost nothing, and never worried much about it.  I fearlessly embarked on adventures that would scare me to death now.

[SteveCoscia]

Fun video - nice 1970s road trip.  Having played both the Rhodes and Wurly back in the day, thought I'd ace the test but got two wrong.

 

For my taste, the Rhodes sound delivered a more visceral performance when digging in.  Plus, I did the Rhodes tine modification which exaggerated it's versatility. 

 

In 1969, my High School bought a dozen Wurlys for a new piano lab.  It was heaven.  I cut every study hall to go to the lab.  Spent hours practicing and improvising.  Those were the days when school districts invested in the arts. 

[Tusker]

Yes both pianos offer a wide range of sounds depending on how you play them and with what effects you process them. This strength is one reason they can be hard to tell apart in a mix. Roll off the highs and you may not hear the high bell of the tines so clearly. Overdrive the mid-range and the barks of both pianos could sound similar.

 

I love the video and the way he covered these insanely great songs. 

[Tusker]

12 hours ago, jerrythek said:

I missed only 1, the Childish Gambino track.

 

I missed one too. It was "Still crazy after all these years."

 

I am going to pretend to myself it was because I was distracted by the brilliance of the song. He channels all this gospel influence while retaining his own voice. 😎

[SMcD]

I self-disqualified from the quiz since most of the tracks in it are the definitive examples of their respective EP's. For instance, when I explain the Wurly to people I usually say "think Supertramp, or You're My Best Friend by Queen". Knowing those are Wurlies, or that Riders on the Storm is a Rhodes, proves nothing 😜 

[David Emm]

I've played a wad of Rhodes pianos, some in rotten condition, others really sweet. I owned a Wurly, partly because it possessed most of what I liked best in a Rhodes, namely a certain rich, fruity tone in the mid/mid-high-range. I'm glad I had those experiences, because I know what a golden deal I'm getting with Logic's Vintage EP. M'god, I never could have imagined it then, but now, I can easily dial in whatever character a piece needs. Goodbye, frazzed tines! 🥳

[Ivan May]

A Fender Rhodes has more sustain than a Wurlitzer does. A Wurlitzer has more overdrive and more control in its tone, and is more aggressive sounding than a Fender Rhodes, especially the Wurlitzer EP180. But more keyboard players use a Wurlitzer EP200 instead, which has the same sound quality as an EP180 but is more quieter than an EP180.

 

As for electric pianos, I’ve always thought that the sound of a Hohner Pianet is easy to mistake for an RMI electric piano, they both have that plinky plonky sixties electric piano sound.

[Dave Weiser]

I did a ton of research into EPs when I worked for Kurzweil...and I'm pretty sure I remember Queen's Best Friend being a Hohner Pianet. It's often mistaken for Wurly as the sounds are very similar - sometimes very hard to distinguish. Listen to the Zombies' She's Not There - it's a Pianet but could easily pass for a Wurly. The giveaway is that usually the Pianet is even brighter than the Wurly, with less overdrive (unless it's being run through an amp with some drive.)

[jerrythek]

2 hours ago, Dave Weiser said:

I did a ton of research into EPs when I worked for Kurzweil...and I'm pretty sure I remember Queen's Best Friend being a Hohner Pianet. It's often mistaken for Wurly as the sounds are very similar - sometimes very hard to distinguish. Listen to the Zombies' She's Not There - it's a Pianet but could easily pass for a Wurly. The giveaway is that usually the Pianet is even brighter than the Wurly, with less overdrive (unless it's being run through an amp with some drive.)

Hi Dave: interesting, but can you find your source of that info. I couldn’t find any reference. On that track there’s a nice “bloom” to the sustained/repeated LH notes that speaks more Wurlie than Pianet to me, but I respect your expertise. Color me curious.

[stillearning]

Missed 2. And 1, I didn’t make a guess in time. Wanted to hear another few seconds on that one.
 

Never owned either, but played my share of both over about a half century of gigging. Prefer Wurly.

[Piktor]

I did get all answers right, but I already knew most of the answers as soon as I knew what the track was. There was a musical period when we seemed to hear Rhodes more often than Wurli. If you weren’t sure, the Rhodes often gave itself away when you could hear the odd metallic clank.
The presenter is right about effects smearing each instrument’s characteristic tone, especially chorus.  I’ve said it before - I can only take chorus on e.p.  in small doses, if at all. I like pretty much every other effect on these instruments but that one. 

[Floyd Tatum]

14 hours ago, Piktor said:

If you weren’t sure, the Rhodes often gave itself away when you could hear the odd metallic clank.

 

Like some others mentioned, a couple of the tunes were pretty easy, because I could remember seeing them being performed, or because the sound was used in a way which made a famous link between the song and the keyboard.  Still Crazy for example.  Or Peg - I mean, come on! Has Fagen ever even touched a Wurly?  Not that I know of.   Oh, wait - Maybe Can't Buy A Thrill.  Ok, scratch that comment. 

 

I can definitely recognize the characteristics of each, especially if I hear it being played long enough, or if it's prominently featured in a way that uses its stand-out characteristics.

 

The two I got wrong were Heard it Through the Grapevine by Marvin Gaye, and Breakdown by Tom Petty.

 

1) HITTGV: He played the moving L.H. fifths, then a R.H. rolling octave.  Sure, I've heard HITTGV a million times, but I couldn't remember seeing it performed live.  When I heard the LH fifths, I knew it was HITTGV, but I though "Ya know, sometimes Rhodes-es can have a low-end clunk like that".  I think it's the same clunk you were talking about, Piktor.   Then he played the high rolling octave - which again, a Rhodes rolling high octave can sound like that.  So, I wasn't sure.  So I said to myself "Rhodes", then the screen said Wurly.   If I'd heard those midrange chords, which he played next, I might have got it.

 

2) Breakdown is a tune I wasn't familiar with.  It came right after HITTGV, so I was rattled.  Again, I heard that clunky sound and thought "Ya know, sometimes Rhodes-es can have a clunk like that", and I fugue-ed up again.

 

But I think he tricked us a little - his Wurly and Rhodes were both mic-ed and eq-ed to emphasize clunk.   And I think the Rhodes clunk is more audible on a Suitcase, which he was playing.    But, I'm probably just making excuses for myself.

 

 

[stoken6]

Not all Rhodes (and not all Wurlies) sound the same. Agree that the recording chain/technique emphasised some inharmonic aspects of the Rhodes more than I have typically heard in recordings.

 

Cheers, Mike.

[sosho]

On 10/23/2023 at 10:25 PM, analogika said:

That version of that second song is not by THAT artist — in fact, that particular version is a major part of the reason why I bought that particular piano. 

Donny Hathaway ?

[jazzpiano88]

My two respective benchmarks at the time were “The Jetsons” and “Do you feel like we do” (Bob Mayo).  
“Feelin Stronger Everyday” also has the canonical Rhodes sound. 

Here’s Richard Carpenter’s perspective:

 “The Fender Rhodes has a nice tremolo if one controls it properly, and it breaks into stereo which would fill out some of the recordings. I first noticed the full effect in 1975 in ‘Only Yesterday’ – there also is some Wurlitzer on that, a fill that breaks out of the sax solo and into the guitar solo. Every now and again, like on ‘Those Good Old Dreams’ and some of the others, I would use the Wurlitzer. But for an actual backing in the rhythm for the chords the Rhodes has a fatter or prettier sound,  whereas the Wurlitzer for certain breaks and fills has a funkier or rastier sound."

[kpl1228]

As someone mentioned earlier, this song is a great example of a Wurly.

To me, it's THE example.