Open Letter to Keyboard Manufacturers - please make a physically modelled Rhodes

[guestuserguestuser.com]

Subject line says it all.

 

I am so sick of playing velocity-switched Rhodes samples. Two or three velocity layers is not enough to make a convincing Rhodes sound! I just rented a Roland RD-700, which I had been really looking forward to as the answer to my gigging needs, and all the godamm Rhodes patches use this wretched velocity switching. It's infuriating. They're virtually unplayable, and it sounds so crappy when they velocity-switch when you're not expecting it.

 

The industry has done such a great job modelling B3's and analogue synths. I realize that it's probably easier to model a B3 since the basic tone generator of a B3 is a sound that doesn't change timbre very much. But still, the Rhodes isn't that complex of a sound either, nowhere near as complex as wind instruments, and the physically-modelled synth makers have taken on wind instruments, so can't they please take on Rhodes's? I would love so much to have a gigging instrument that's lightweight and has killer acoustic piano, rhodes, B3 and analog synth sounds.

 

Which brings up an interesting side point - there are some really good digital acoustic pianos around, such as Yamaha P200, P80, etc., and I know they're not using physical modelling for their acoustic piano patches. If they're using velocity-switching on those ac.pno patches, then they are doing it in a very subtle way, where you can't hear the switch points. If that's true, then why can't the same technique be applied to the sample-based Rhodes patches? Why is it that so many of the Rhodes patches on these romplers have velocity switching implemented in such a crude way, where the switch points are so obvious? And why is this crudity accepted as the norm and people don't seem to complain very much about it?

 

UPDATE:

 

Oops, I just realized there's another topic already here called "Modeling vs. sampling & a product concept", which says pretty much the same thing. Oh well, this topic is important enough to have two threads devoted to it, I think!

 

 

This message has been edited by guestuser@guestuser.com on 07-25-2001 at 06:19 PM

[steadyb]

Emagic makes the EVP88 (for Logic) and EVP73(available as a plug-in for VST 2.0-compatible sequencing software), and they're dead on. Check out the demo: http://www.emagic.de/english/products/instruments/evp73.html

 

steadyb

[guestuserguestuser.com]

I just looked at the Clavia Nord Electro manual. It has a physically-modelled B3 section, but the Rhodes sounds are multi-sampled. It says that they are "multi-sampled in a vast amounts of velocity levels". This sounds promising - the more velocity-levels there are, the less noticeable the velocity-switches would be. Also, perhaps they are using velocity-crossfading instead of cross-switching.

 

I am very eager to try one of these things, although at this point, having tried nearly every synthesizer available on the market, I kind of expect to be disappointed. But, I still want to try it out.

[guestuserguestuser.com]

Originally posted by steadyb:

Emagic makes the EVP88 (for Logic) and EVP73(available as a plug-in for VST 2.0-compatible sequencing software), and they're dead on. Check out the demo: http://www.emagic.de/english/products/instruments/evp73.html

 

steadyb

 

Yes, that sounds very interesting. But I need a real keyboard instrument for gigging with, and I'm not about to start taking a computer to gigs with me.

[mojosaur]

You could get an internet connection and post to the Keyboard Corner from the stage.....that would be cool. Get your e-mail between songs. LOL

 

 

 

This message has been edited by mojosaur on 07-25-2001 at 04:44 PM

[dansouth]

First of all, any "real keyboard" that you buy today is a computer with black and white keys attached. There is absolutely no difference between this architecture and a combination of a laptop, an audio card, and a controller.

 

Secondly, if you don't like programs that use velocity switching, it's a trivial matter to modify those programs to use the same sample throughout the 0 - 127 velocity range.

[guestuserguestuser.com]

Originally posted by dansouth@yahoo.com:

First of all, any "real keyboard" that you buy today is a computer with black and white keys attached. There is absolutely no difference between this architecture and a combination of a laptop, an audio card, and a controller.

 

Yes I know that digital synths are computers. If you want to take a computer to gigs, fine. I know there are some people that do it, but I don't plan to be one of them, thanks anyway. The difference to me is that a keyboard is one unit, whereas a controller+laptop+audiocard+midi interface is potentially four separate devices which need setting up and tearing down. I own a desktop computer not a laptop, which presents another problem. Also, there are potential problems associated with using a computer such as: lengthy bootup times, less reliable/robust than keyboard instruments, and so on.

 

Secondly, if you don't like programs that use velocity switching, it's a trivial matter to modify those programs to use the same sample throughout the 0 - 127 velocity range.

 

I don't think that's a good solution. First off, in some synths and digital pianos the velocity switching is built right into the multisample and you can't edit it out. I can think of many examples of that, Roland RD-700 for example. Second, even if you can edit the layers, the fact that it's a "trivial matter to edit the program" doesn't address the real problem. Using one multisample over the entire velocity range sucks almost as much as patches that have obvious velocity-switches. What we really need is either physical modelling of the Rhodes' response to velocity, or else a whole lot of velocity switches instead of the 2 or 3 you usually get. What the optimum number would be, I don't know. All I know is I'll be happy when I can't hear the velocity switches!

 

 

This message has been edited by guestuser@guestuser.com on 07-25-2001 at 05:44 PM

[sign]

I have bought a real Rhodes, it's a lot less heavy than my Hammond http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gifhttp://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gifhttp://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

[Guest]

This is something I have been thinking of for years. i'm a regular poster on the rhodes list and all the emulations I've heard are not that good to me. My Korg SG Rack Piano had great reviews for both piano and e-piano sounds but I find it unplayable. it sits here gathering dust...

 

I heard the VST plug in, but I also seemed to hear the exact same sound played when a not was repeated at the same velocity which my ear immediately recognised as being wrong. but saying that it was the best effort yet. I'm thinking of getting a laptop/ext USB soundcard and a master keyboard and gigging with that. The Native Instruments B4 organ emulation was incredible too i thought. modelling seems to be the way to go.

 

We really need a keyboard which can emualte at least 10 different layers. I listen to the Yamaha S 80 sounds that people rave on about and I gotta say I'm massively unimpressed, I can't believe that people would really think thats a great keyboard, I think the sounds in my SB Live card are better tahn that. thank god for being able to audition sounds live on-line.. afew years ago I'd have bought a keyboard based on reviews in mags.. but not anymore.

 

Also I'm quite impressed by the P80s acoustic piano sound but every now and then i hear a few notes which sound wrong, maybe they tried to stretch a note a bit too far or something.

 

I herad th Gigasampler piano and don't hear why its so impressive, perhaps when you actually play it, it feels better, but to just listen to it..?? i don't know...

 

peace

Neil

 

This message has been edited by neil_loughran@hotmail.com on 07-25-2001 at 04:54 PM

[guestuserguestuser.com]

Originally posted by sign:

I have bought a real Rhodes, it's a lot less heavy than my Hammond http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gifhttp://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gifhttp://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

 

My sympathies to your back.

[Rod S]

Originally posted by dansouth@yahoo.com:

First of all, any "real keyboard" that you buy today is a computer with black and white keys attached. There is absolutely no difference between this architecture and a combination of a laptop, an audio card, and a controller.

 

I disagree Dan. Yes, it is a chip with an operating system/firmware to process the functions. But to say there is no difference is absurd.

 

However, it doesn't have all the overhead that a PC or MAC operating system has. The synth is layout out for a single purpose. A PC or MAC OS's was not done with audio/midi only in mind, and there's a lot of other stuff going on = more stuff that can go wrong.

 

There is an important difference. I personally would still not take a laptop to a concert, unless I had a dual system setup with mirror images, so that I could flip a switch and change laptops. I personally have built and setup computers that functioned perfectly, but I still don't trust them in a critical situation like this.

[Organ Doctor]

Since I have seen the evolution of keyboards for the last 30 years,

inside and out, this thread would have been science fiction,not too long ago. I love the Rhodes sound, but I also love the Rhodes touch. They may indeed get the sound right some day, but the touch??? I want both!! gimme a Rhodes !!

[sign]

Originally posted by guestuser@guestuser.com:

My sympathies to your back.

 

Well, thank you very much. I have no pain yet, I can carry it alone, got some wheels to help me http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif

 

No joke, I love the sound of the Rhodes too, it's not a complex sound but the velocity is quite complicated IMHO.

 

Hit it hard and it gets soooo fat!! I play it with a Leslie 925, great sound.

 

I have some synth's with Rhodes sounds too, but the real one will 'eat them for breakfast and shit them before lunch' (this is how Fletcher would say it).

 

Peace.

[coyote]

Since Emagic has it already, perhaps they or another mfg could find a way to take their existing work, make an OS for it, and drop it into a module? No point reinventing the wheel - we're only talking about adding a different carriage to it....

[Steve123]

Hi Guys,

 

This is my first post to this forum. I play mostly piano, organ, clav-type sounds in a blues band and I'm an old Rhodes 73 Stage model player from way

back. I currently gig with an old (shall I say "vintage") Yamaha KX-88

controller driving an old Roland P-330 digital piano module and a Roland

JV-1010 with a Keyboards of the 60's and 70's expansion module in it. I can

share some of the frustration the thread-starter feels about the velocity-swicthed Rhodes sounds. I too was initially very dissapointed with the Roland 60/70s card. While many of the patches on the 60/70s card sounded like a Rhodes, they didn't play like one.

 

Over the course of a couple of months time (cycling between gigs and editing the module by computer at home) I was able to tweak-up a decent Rhodes sound for gigging (not that it would ever be as good as the 115 lb original). Here are a few things that I did that dramatically improved things:

 

(1) My KX-88 lacked control over it's velocity characteristics (i.e. how

actual playing force translated into midi velocity values). The KX-88 has a

heavy, but to me, great feel. Higher velocity levels (say above 115-120) on

my unit require herculean force to achieve, however, so many modules can tend to sound dull. Not having much money, and not wanting to give up the KX-88, I bought a MIDI Solutions velocity switcher (about $95) that gave me the choice of 63 different velocity curves (including one that can be user defined) - a different curve can be applied to each midi channel. Changing curves dramatically changed the respone and feel of the instrument when driving a particular module's piano sounds. I finally settled in on a curve that drove both of my modules acceptably. I don't know what type of control over velocity curves you have on the RD-700, but such control is really critical to playablility IMO.

 

(2) I turned off all the effects on the JV-1010 and went to work on the 73

Stage piano patch. This multi-sample has the infamous two-level velocity

switching on the samples. I spent a good deal of time in Emagic Soundiver

adjusting the velocity switch-point and levels of the mulitsamples. Pretty

soon it sounded very much like my old dry Rhodes output would and the KX played very much like it as well (A sampler with a lot of memory and nice Rhodes samples tweaked this way would of course be even better). I adjusted the amount of crossfade to make the switch less obvious.

 

(3) I then adjusted the VCF's to filter out some of the noise (the original

Rhodes wasn't exactly quiet and the Roland patch wasn't even using the

filters). This also masked the switching effect a bit more.

 

(4) I added EQ to give me more tine sound and a little more bottom, Chorus, and a little Reverb and I was done. A comparison to the original was like night and day. Time for some Crusaders!

 

Now I'm really happy with my vintage Rhodes sounds. I have also gone through the same process with the Wurly and Clav sounds on the JV module and really enjoy playing those as well. I know many belittle the sound "Romplers" out there, but with the sophisticated synth engines they have, the user ram memory locations, and a little programming effort they can sound and respond close to what an individual player wants them to - at least for playing in clubs.

 

As usual YMMV.

 

Regards, Steve

[synthetic]

I just bought "Keyboards of the 60's and 70's Vol. 2" for my Roland sampler. The Rhodes sample is very nice, I think it's a four-way cross-switch. And the Wurlitzer is a 32MB 6-way cross-switch. That thing sounds unbelievable! One of the most playable samples I've ever used.

 

I'm also waiting for Modeling to have it's day. Korg has the Oasis, but it's a PCI card. Most of the software synths I've looked at have too much .......latency. But with multi-gigaflop laptops becoming common, it's just a matter of time before that improves (I hope).

 

As far as hardware synths with modeling engines, they currently don't sell enough units to bring the price down. I mean acoustic models, analog synth models seem to sell well. Plus the R&D required is complex enough that only companies like Yamaha and Roland even bother. I think that's why analog synth models are so popular, you just plug the minimoog into the computer and study it. You don't have to worry about building an anechoic perfectly-tuned piano, etc.

 

We just have to be patient. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/frown.gif

 

-jl

[Wiggum]

Hasn't this already been done with the Roland / Rhodes partnership in the early nineties? Granted, those boards probably can't compete with today's technology, but they are still an option. I don't think they were physically modeled, but relied instead on Rolands SA synthesis process.

 

All the best,

 

Wiggum

[Allan Speers]

Try to find a used Roland MKS-20. I have this plus a real Rhodes. WHile I love the latter, the MKS-80 comes VERY close. It was additive synthesis. 128 layers of timbre change. Even gets the tine overdrive thang a little bit. You must run it into a tube amp for maximum effect, but I'm telling you..

 

There was also the P-330, but it didn't quite sound as open and rich.

 

The MKS-20 also has pretty killer clav and vibes patches, also additive. Even the pianos, though somewhat lacking in realism, are a blast to play, simply due to the 128 velocity layers.

[Guest]

Agreed, I have the RD-300S from 1987 which also uses SAS (Structured Adaptive Synthesis) and find the dynamic response very good on all the patches even if they don't particularly sound that modern these days. The piano sounds a bit dull, but is very responsive, maybe mine needs calibrating as i really want to whack the thing and get a harder tone out of it but it just levels out a bit short of what I'd like to hear.

 

I find the e-pianos very good in the middle register, but high up they are unusable, unless you like "smooth jazz sounds".

 

The MK-80 (not MKS-80 that was the Super Jupiter) also used the SAS technique.

 

I bought the SG Korg piano module a few years ago and I turned it on for the first time in a year yesterday and couldn't believe how awful that module really is... bright, percussive, unplayable.. unless you like house music. I couldn't play really soft on it as the tone still sounded like I was hitting moderately hard. The RD was/is much better for real playing.

 

Peace

neil

[raregroove_dup1]

I have an 88 key Mark II Rhodes and Whurlizer 200A as well as the Emagic EVP88 plug in running on logic. I can tell you the plug in is unbelievable, the emulations are better than any sample i've ever used and I A/B ed the real units along side the plug ins in my studio. I would not hesitate to use if as a substitute for either one. My only beef is there is a slight percussive attack transient at the beginning of striking a note with the plug in that needs to be addressed (still the software is only a 1.0 version! ) Logic on a laptop is extremely stable if you have a clean, debugged software build and this way you have incredible control of your sound and convience.

 

my 02 cents.

[synthfoolsynthfool.com]

I like the MKS-20 (and used to own an RD-1000), but I've never been a huge fan of the units, as I hear some pretty annoying artifacts in almost all of them. If you own one, take a raw vibe sound and listen closely to the tail end of the sound as it dies away, especially in the higher registers. I can often hear a brittle distortion (not just on vibes, but most noticeable on them.)

Some units are worse than others.

 

While not unusable, for standout solo work it can be annoying.

If you're in the market for a used MKS-20, -ALWAYS- listen to the unit closely before making the purchase. Headphones are recommended and make sure to listen to them both with the chorus on and off.

I've repaired many of them in the last 5 or so years because of failing chorus chips also. (Panasonic bucket brigades). These chips are getting harder to find in good condition and there's talk of them having a finite shelf/in unit lifespan.

Failure modes include distortion, added noise or loss of depth.

The MKS20 also is one of the few Roland devices that has a HUGE non epoxy pcb for it's analog processing and is more prone to getting cracked lead/pad solder connections. These can can cause all manners of problems, but even in one that's basically operating, they can cause loss of headroom, distortion, noise, etc.

If you have to get one, get one that hasn't been roaded or left powered on for years. One left in a dry closet for a dozen years would probably be better. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif

[coyote]

I own an MK-80. Particularly in the midrange it does a better Rhodes impersonation than most devices I've heard, and its attack characteristics in the low octaves are pretty good. It has a smooth transition from soft to hard playing; no evidence of velo-switching. I also find the acoustic piano sound somewhat pleasing. I use it as my primary piano and layer my Nanopiano behind it at lower volume for resonance.

 

Originally posted by neil_loughran@hotmail.com:

I find the e-pianos very good in the middle register, but high up they are unusable, unless you like "smooth jazz sounds".

 

The MK-80 (not MKS-80 that was the Super Jupiter) also used the SAS technique.

 

I bought the SG Korg piano module a few years ago and I turned it on for the first time in a year yesterday and couldn't believe how awful that module really is... bright, percussive, unplayable..

Peace

neil

[Botch.]

At the risk of getting pelted with flaming tomatoes, this is one reason the DX-7 Rhodes patch was so popular (at least for awhile). FM synthesis allows continuous change in the timbre and the attack of a note throughout its full velocity range. I do realize most people are sick of the FM Rhodes sound (I'm not) but you do have to admit there's no "velocity switching"!

[guestuserguestuser.com]

Originally posted by botch@netutah.net:

At the risk of getting pelted with flaming tomatoes, this is one reason the DX-7 Rhodes patch was so popular (at least for awhile). FM synthesis allows continuous change in the timbre and the attack of a note throughout its full velocity range. I do realize most people are sick of the FM Rhodes sound (I'm not) but you do have to admit there's no "velocity switching"!

 

You're exactly right. I owned a Rhodes since 1973, and I can remember when the DX7 came out, I bought one, and loved the electric piano sound, one of the reasons being the one you mentioned. The other main one being it was a lot easier to haul to gigs! It's amazing that since that time, I've been searching in vain for something better. Yes, I'm serious. Even a Triton in the electric piano department doesn't measure up. If there's something better, tell me what it is. I'm talking an instrument with keys, not a plug-in. There's always a compromise somewhere - bad Rhodes samples, bad velocity switching, it's always something. Obviously in some areas there's been improvement, but really, in the electric piano department, I still don't think the industry has beaten the Rhodes or the DX7.

[JMB]

Granted I'm not a Rhodes expert, but the Kurzweil PC2 has great Rhodes sounds. I believe it only uses 2 velocity switches (maybe more, I'll have to check) but I can't hear it switch at all.

 

Originally posted by guestuser@guestuser.com:

First off, in some synths and digital pianos the velocity switching is built right into the multisample and you can't edit it out. I can think of many examples of that, Roland RD-700 for example.

 

I find it very hard to believe that the RD-700 won't allow you to edit the velocity switching. But if that's true get a PC2. The Rhodes programs sound better and it is very easy to edit the velocity switching if needed.

 

This message has been edited by JMB on 07-31-2001 at 10:00 AM

[mwisniewski]

Nord Electro - could it be the answer? We'll have to see ... same bat channel ... same bat time ..

 

http://www.harmony-central.com/Newp/2001/Electro-Shipping.html

[JMB]

Originally posted by mwisniewski:

Nord Electro - could it be the answer? We'll have to see ... same bat channel ... same bat time ..

 

http://www.harmony-central.com/Newp/2001/Electro-Shipping.html

 

Man that keyboard looks good!! It even comes with waterfall keys! I can't wait to hear what it sounds like.

[DeeSquare]

Originally posted by mwisniewski:

Nord Electro - could it be the answer? We'll have to see ... same bat channel ... same bat time ..

 

 

Check it out, they've posted some MP3's of this thing.

 

http://www.clavia.se/clavia/MP3.htm#electro

[JMB]

It sounds pretty dang good. Even the piano impressed me. Now I'm ready to play it. Heck maybe I'll get rid of my PC2 and buy the Electro and then a rack Rompler for my other needs.

 

 

 

This message has been edited by JMB on 07-31-2001 at 01:52 PM

[coyote]

I wrote to Emagic concerning this issue. Here is their response:

 

Hello,

well, you are by far not the first one with that idea. However, that is

currently not on the top of our list.... The idea of virtual instruments

"inside" the computer has become very popular, and we noticed, that more

and more musicians go on stage with their notebook.

 

Anyways, I´ll forward your mail to the product managment department.

Please be patient and enter our website frequently.

 

So if I'm "by far not the first", that indicates some market potential, right? And yet it's obviously not even on their radar screen. Makes you wonder sometimes....