Recording RHODES

[clusterchord]

---copy of a post to GM rec forum---

 

I plan to use rented real Rhodes for a recording

session for the first time instead of a rompler.

 

I have no knowledge about tracking it into DAW.

It will probably be a Stage, therefore without

speakers, but i'm not sure yet. I'll use EHX

flanger and SmallStone guitar pedals.

 

Any suggestions? How do I build my signal chain?

 

do i go direct to pedals > D.I. > A/D

or mike an ac30 or something?

 

Closest match to a sound I'm looking for would be

OK Computer by RadioHead, all that progressive

brit retro 70s sound. sparkly tremolo in ambient

songs and semi-bark in guitar dense songs.

 

Rhodes Model suggestion for this?

what kind of tremolo to use?

 

As far as mic and pre/d.i. we have:

TL Audio C1,JoeMeek VC1q, C12,SM57,NT1

 

I'll use Wurli200A on one song , so the same question applies here i guess...

 

thank you for any kind of input/experience

 

tom

[B3Nut]

See if you can rent a Fender Twin Reverb amp. About any tube guitar amp with 12's will work nicely for recording EP's. A Leslie can be really cool too sometimes...

 

TP

[linwood]

http://www.speakeasyvintagemusic.com/store.html

[zbb]

A Sure SM57 in front of a Fender tube amp?

[Infusion]

Running your Rhodes through a speaker is great to capture the ambience, but I would audition your various pres with the Rhodes. The pres can really fatten and amplify the signal before it goes into the DAW. I never record any of my keys without first going through a pre and I don't use speaker cabs. I go direct into the DAW.

[SoundMeister]

For many classic recordings, Rhodes were recorded directly from the board. If the console had transformers, it would add some nice highlights. As for more recent recordings, as you've noticed the tremelo is still an important feature. There are outboard effects that will add that for you.

 

I agree with the other suggestions about using a pre before going into the DAW.

 

BTW, we have a tasty collection of Rhodes and Wurlitzer EPs (also includes Pianet, Clav and DX7 sounds) in Akai and Kurzweil format. Check the demos:

http://www.pyramid-sound.com/shop/rhodes.htm

 

~Peter Schouten

Pyramid Sound Productions

[Dave Horne]

What I'm going to say will not really add anything to this discussion, but why use a 'real' Rhodes when you use a sample and be sure that your attack (on your own midi controller) will be what you expect.

 

Using a sample will also make it easier for the recording engineer to work with and will probably be less noisy that the 'real' one.

 

I used Rhodes for many years and it was frustrating having to open it up and constantly make adjustments ... I know I am not alone here.

 

Wizoo offers their Magnetica CD sample for $20 (it's been maked down and I paid much more). I use their Rhodes sample (on an Akai sampler) on jobs and couldn't be happier.

 

I personally do not feel there is any advantage for using a 'real' Rhodes when a sample will give you more control and less headaches for the recording engineer.

[SoundMeister]

Originally posted by Dave Horne:

Using a sample will also make it easier for the recording engineer to work with and will probably be less noisy that the 'real' one.

Agreed. Rhodes can be fairly noisy depending on state of repair, shielding, etc. We ran our samples through some pretty fancy denoising software to deal with these issues. It takes fairly fancy denoising to handle it without coloring the signal. Unless the studio you're working with has ways of dealing with these issues, the result may not be satisfying. And if they have ways of dealing with these, it may not be cost-effective for you to go that route.

 

Also, no two Rhodes sound alike. Rhodes tones come down to personal taste and musical context. What if the rented Rhodes is not not giving you the sounds you're after? From that perspective, a collection with different model EPs that have been set up for varied timbres could be very helpful.

 

In addition to tremelo/panning, Rhodes sounds are usually effected with Chorus, phase shifter, etc. Depending on how you work, the effects could be added after tracking or you might want to have them be part of the performance. Because these effects are cyclic, they can often be an important part of the performance. If your playing it out of sync with the cycle, it might not sound right. Our collections use the Akai and Kurzweil effects engines to provide lots of different flavors.

 

your attack (on your own midi controller) will be what you expect.

 

Not a minor point. Actually a really good point. The keyboard action on real Rhodes is very different from a typical synth. Unless you quickly get used to the rented keyboard, it could cramp your style.

 

I personally do not feel there is any advantage for using a 'real' Rhodes when a sample will give you more control and less headaches for the recording engineer.

 

I understand the spirit of wanting to "do it right" by bringing in a real Rhodes. However, some of our friends/customers who actually have a real Rhodes right there in the studio tell me that in recording projects they end up using our samples instead of the real thing. That probably says something about the quality of our samples, but I think it also says something about the practicality/cost-effectiveness of sampled Rhodes versus the real instrument.

 

I haven't done a survey, but I would think many Rhodes players used to the real thing appreciate the midi aspect of using samples as well as the variety of a comprehensive collection of sampled EPs. It's true - some nuances on tone and response are lost when using samples - but that is offset by some pretty major advantages, midi being one of them.

 

~Peter Schouten

Pyramid Sound Productions

[Superbobus]

Dave, you've got a point, but a well maintained Rhodes still beat ANY sample out there. There's this little "edge" that no sample has. If your choice would be between a not so good Rhodes and a good sample, I'd go for the sample.

Maybe within a few years, sampling technique will be able to beat a "Herbie-style" Rhodes, we'll see. But I even didn't start about the great feel of a well kept Rhodes keyboard action.

 

Soulstars

[Dave Horne]

Originally posted by Superbobus:

Dave, you've got a point, but a well maintained Rhodes still beat ANY sample out there. There's this little "edge" that no sample has. If your choice would be between a not so good Rhodes and a good sample, I'd go for the sample.

Maybe within a few years, sampling technique will be able to beat a "Herbie-style" Rhodes, we'll see. But I even didn't start about the great feel of a well kept Rhodes keyboard action.

 

Soulstars

Superbobus,

 

double blind test at twenty paces, winner takes all

[Steve123]

Back in the day (early 80's), I went from the direct out from the board mic-pre to a compressor/peak-limiter (to tame the incredible dynamic range a Rhodes can have) to a graphic-eq to tape. I was trying to get a clean dyno sound. I'd use chorus, phaser, what have you, on mix-down. I'd do the same thing today with A/D input replacing tape.

 

I did a lot of tinkering with the Rhodes to get a bright, bell-like sound with an even volume and sustain on each note. I know others can relate to this. The position of pick-ups with respect to the tines, the condition of tines and hammer tips, etc, greatly effects the sound. I concur that a rented instrument might be quite problematical to get the sound you might be looking for.

 

Today I get Rhodes sounds out of a Roland P-330 and a JV-1010 with the Keyboards of the 60's and 70's card. I dream of a sampler with a good library or a good model tho'

 

Good luck!

[Dave Horne]

Originally posted by Steve123:

Today I get Rhodes sounds out of a Roland P-330 and a JV-1010 with the Keyboards of the 60's and 70's card. I dream of a sampler with a good library or a good model tho'

 

Good luck!

Steve, I owned a P-330, it was excellent! I sold it when I moved to Europe. I could work an entire job with the two basic electric piano sounds. I had forgotten all about that model.

 

I bought mine about 15 years ago at Sam Ash in northern NJ. I bought it on impulse and was never unhappy with it.

 

I do remember that it had a poor acoustic piano patch, but I never used that. I'm rambling ... off topic.

[Infusion]

I agree, the real Rhodes can be problematic. I had a 73 key and then an 88 key for years.

I don't miss the weight issue or the fact that it goes out of tune.

Every once in a while, I'll hear some keyboard player kickin some serious ass with a genuine Rhodes. (like Fredrico Penna, Meshell Ndegeocello's keyboard player) It's times like that when I wish I had one of those historic beasts.

But this is the age of digital and my aging Korg SGProX sounds "fat" and in your face on recordings and jams. Basically it boils down to the fact that I have (1) keyboard and about (10) smokin EPs.

[Steve LeBlanc]

I personally do not feel there is any advantage for using a 'real' Rhodes when a sample will give you more control and less headaches for the recording engineer.

The 'noise' a Rhodes makes is not unpleasant or even noticable to most ears...amp noise is a another issue but if you run the Rhodes direct it's not.

 

The advantage is there for some players...others it's not...it's a personal thing.

 

I challenge ANYONE to get the sounds I get out of my Rhodes with a sampler...to me they are musical and the subtle nuances (different levels of barking, etc.) are impossible to recreate. I wouldn't play it if it sounded like shit, to me it sounds great. I have amp noise problems with my Fender Twin sometimes that drive me nuts but my Rhodes sounds great to my ears...it's a unique instrument, not a bad copy of one.

 

But to each his own.

[Dave Horne]

Originally posted by Stephen LeBlanc:

I personally do not feel there is any advantage for using a 'real' Rhodes when a sample will give you more control and less headaches for the recording engineer.

The 'noise' a Rhodes makes is not unpleasant or even noticable to most ears...amp noise is a another issue but if you run the Rhodes direct it's not.

 

The advantage is there for some players...others it's not...it's a personal thing.

 

I challenge ANYONE to get the sounds I get out of my Rhodes with a sampler...to me they are musical and the subtle nuances (different levels of barking, etc.) are impossible to recreate. I wouldn't play it if it sounded like shit, to me it sounds great. I have amp noise problems with my Fender Twin sometimes that drive me nuts but my Rhodes sounds great to my ears...it's a unique instrument, not a bad copy of one.

 

But to each his own.

As I wrote earlier ... double blind test at 20 paces. If you can discern a 'real' Rhodes from a well sampled Rhodes when listening to a CD, you have better ears than I. I stand by my previous comment .... double blind test at 20 paces; perhaps Keyboard Magazine could run the test.

 

I would be willing to bet that the output of a Rhodes needs considerably more gain than the output of a module made in the last five years; that equates to more noise, period.

 

Any recording engineers who would care to comment?

[jeffbayson]

Has anyone tried running a Rhodes/Wurly through a POD? I have been considering getting a POD XT for this very purpose. I would run the electric piano through the POD and a pre, then into my DAW. I would assume the POD could give you the wide range of sounds you're looking for (via combinations of amp models and effects), without losing that authentic Rhodes sound - but then again, I'm only speculating.

[orangefunk]

Originally posted by Stephen LeBlanc:

I personally do not feel there is any advantage for using a 'real' Rhodes when a sample will give you more control and less headaches for the recording engineer.

The 'noise' a Rhodes makes is not unpleasant or even noticable to most ears...amp noise is a another issue but if you run the Rhodes direct it's not.

 

The advantage is there for some players...others it's not...it's a personal thing.

 

I challenge ANYONE to get the sounds I get out of my Rhodes with a sampler...to me they are musical and the subtle nuances (different levels of barking, etc.) are impossible to recreate. I wouldn't play it if it sounded like shit, to me it sounds great. I have amp noise problems with my Fender Twin sometimes that drive me nuts but my Rhodes sounds great to my ears...it's a unique instrument, not a bad copy of one.

 

But to each his own.

Like Steve I'm a rhodes freak, I've spent more hours working on that thing than doing my PhD!! However there is a cool sampleset out there which does indeed beat evrything (except the real thing!) its at http://www.scarbee.com

 

Having heard Steve play a year or so ago on some mp3 I can assure you that no sample could do that... I love playing my rhodes, although I don't go to the mixer from the front jack I go direct from the harp.. the difference is like having your ears syringed!

 

Aslso I have a preamp but the batterys go so fast its gotten monotonous using it... great sound though..

[Steve LeBlanc]

Originally posted by Dave Horne:

Originally posted by Stephen LeBlanc:

I personally do not feel there is any advantage for using a 'real' Rhodes when a sample will give you more control and less headaches for the recording engineer.

The 'noise' a Rhodes makes is not unpleasant or even noticable to most ears...amp noise is a another issue but if you run the Rhodes direct it's not.

 

The advantage is there for some players...others it's not...it's a personal thing.

 

I challenge ANYONE to get the sounds I get out of my Rhodes with a sampler...to me they are musical and the subtle nuances (different levels of barking, etc.) are impossible to recreate. I wouldn't play it if it sounded like shit, to me it sounds great. I have amp noise problems with my Fender Twin sometimes that drive me nuts but my Rhodes sounds great to my ears...it's a unique instrument, not a bad copy of one.

 

But to each his own.

As I wrote earlier ... double blind test at 20 paces. If you can discern a 'real' Rhodes from a well sampled Rhodes when listening to a CD, you have better ears than I. I stand by my previous comment .... double blind test at 20 paces; perhaps Keyboard Magazine could run the test.

 

I would be willing to bet that the output of a Rhodes needs considerably more gain than the output of a module made in the last five years; that equates to more noise, period.

 

Any recording engineers who would care to comment?

Sure I'd be happy to take that test...if I'm proven wrong so be it. But the test has to be more than 4 bars...I'd suggest minimum 8-16...and it has to be an expressive part...not just background chords all played the same.

 

My 1977 Rhodes has a lot of output...I would argue if you can't tell the difference between a Real Rhodes and a Sampled one you won't hear the noise difference either.

 

But seriously...I'd like to take the test. I don't think Keyboard Mag would want to sponsor a test like that because manufacturers don't sell real Rhodes anymore.

 

But if someone wants to put it together...I'll playfully bet you $5 I can guess between the two. (or put a tampon on my head and post the pic as my avatar )

[Steve LeBlanc]

I just listened to the Scarbee samples...they do sound very good and would work in most band situations through the right amp/PA...but I'd still rather play my real Rhodes.

[Dave Horne]

Steve, I do most of my practicing on a Yamaha GranTouch 1 piano. This is a hybrid - a real piano action (from a six footer) and Yamaha's best sample from their flagship piano.

 

I've recorded myself and played it back and I can not tell if it as recorded on a 'real' piano or not. I play it for friends ... same response.

 

I'm reminded of those old issues of DownBeat where some (very well known) musicians swore they could tell the difference between white performers and black performers; they failed miserably.

 

You're on ... a $5 bet. I bet you can not consistently tell the difference between two flavors of a Rhodes when listening to a CD.

 

What would be interesting - have someone sample your Rhodes and have various players play both the 'real' Rhodes and the sample.

 

Keyboard magazine ... are you listening?

[SoundMeister]

Originally posted by eljefe:

Has anyone tried running a Rhodes/Wurly through a POD? I have been considering getting a POD XT for this very purpose. I would run the electric piano through the POD and a pre, then into my DAW. I would assume the POD could give you the wide range of sounds you're looking for (via combinations of amp models and effects), without losing that authentic Rhodes sound - but then again, I'm only speculating.

Not a bad idea ... depending on what you mean by "that authentic Rhodes sound." We've had people come through the studio looking for "that sound" and after we listen to the recordings they were using for their frame of reference, it turned out they were looking for a DX7 'Rhodes'!

 

To me that "that authentic Rhodes sound" was a Fender Rhodes playing through it's own inefficient speaker and low power amp cranked all the way up.

 

The problem with outboard effects is that they can obscure the tonality of the instrument to where it sounds more like the effects than the electric piano. A little chorusing or just some shallow phase shifter goes a long way. You could try the POD, but I think I'd grab an old MXR or Mutron phase shifter first.

 

I've heard some things about Real Nice Compressor for use with a DAW. Supposedly it does a good job livening up stark digital sound. I should look into that further. Anyone here using it?

 

~Peter Schouten

Pyramid Sound Productions

Rhodes for Akai & Kurzweil samplers

 

P.S. Clusterchord, sorry about second guessing the rental. Maybe you're renting it because it gives you the sound you're after.

[Steve LeBlanc]

I'm reminded of those old issues of DownBeat where some (very well known) musicians swore they could tell the difference between white performers and black performers; they failed miserably.

Well wait just a minute there...that's a whole different thing.

 

I'm 100% sure I will hear a difference between the two samples in a blind test...I can't absolutely for sure that I'll pick the right one.

 

But I am willing to risk the embarrassment because I'm really confident I'll be able to tell the difference through good speakers or good headphones.

[jeffbayson]

Originally posted by SoundMeister:

Originally posted by eljefe:

[qb]Has anyone tried running a Rhodes/Wurly through a POD? I have been considering getting a POD XT for this very purpose. I would run the electric piano through the POD and a pre, then into my DAW. I would assume the POD could give you the wide range of sounds you're looking for (via combinations of amp models and effects), without losing that authentic Rhodes sound - but then again, I'm only speculating.

Not a bad idea ... depending on what you mean by "that authentic Rhodes sound." We've had people come through the studio looking for "that sound" and after we listen to the recordings they were using for their frame of reference, it turned out they were looking for a DX7 'Rhodes'!

 

To me that "that authentic Rhodes sound" was a Fender Rhodes playing through it's own inefficient speaker and low power amp cranked all the way up.

 

The problem with outboard effects is that they can obscure the tonality of the instrument to where it sounds more like the effects than the electric piano. A little chorusing or just some shallow phase shifter goes a long way. You could try the POD, but I think I'd grab an old MXR or Mutron phase shifter first.

 

I've heard some things about Real Nice Compressor for use with a DAW. Supposedly it does a good job livening up stark digital sound. I should look into that further. Anyone here using it?

[QB]

Yeah... I was hoping the flexibility of the POD would allow you to keep it from overwhelming the tone. I already have a MXR, and I was thinking about getting a Tube Screamer, and some other effects... when I realized I could get all of that stuff with the POD (or a close approximation of it), and actually save some money. Of course, the POD would have the additional benefit of giving me weird, overpowering effects-driven sounds if I wanted them, so I could have those in my arsenal, as well.

 

I am *NOT* looking for that DX7 sound. I showed up at a session recently where the engineer said the house board had "a killer-sounding synth, with authentic old-style Rhodes sound," so I didn't bring my board. Let's just say if I had used his patch, it would have sounded more like "Wind Beneath My Wings" than the dirty-funk feel I was going for.

 

Funny you mention it - I just bought an RNC and an RNP. I haven't really used them that much yet, so I can't say a whole lot about how they work with my Rhodes. Actually, the RNP added a horrible buzz to my Rhodes which my Mackie pre's didn't add, but then again, I haven't had much time to troubleshoot, so I certainly can't condemn it yet.

[Dave Horne]

Steve,

 

I am sure you can tell the difference bewteen two different samples ... or any combination of a 'real' Rhodes and a Rhodes sample.

 

The question is, can you tell which is the sample and which is not? I would fail in such a test.

 

The reference to DownBeat ... well, maybe I could have done better. Remotely related ... or not.

[Superbobus]

Has anyone tried running a Rhodes/Wurly through a POD? I have been considering getting a POD XT for this very purpose. I would run the electric piano through the POD and a pre, then into my DAW. I would assume the POD could give you the wide range of sounds you're looking for (via combinations of amp models and effects), without losing that authentic Rhodes sound - but then again, I'm only speculating.

I have the original POD and I must say, it ROCKS. But... it needs a good volume output setting, otherwise the noise is too much. I don't care about a little noise though, it's part of that old feeling.

Dave, I'm on. But the test has to include playing a note from soft to loud gradually and at least one loud sustained chord. This is where all samples I heard have failed so far.

 

Soulstars

[orangefunk]

Originally posted by Dave Horne:

Steve,

 

I am sure you can tell the difference bewteen two different samples ... or any combination of a 'real' Rhodes and a Rhodes sample.

 

The question is, can you tell which is the sample and which is not? I would fail in such a test.

 

The reference to DownBeat ... well, maybe I could have done better. Remotely related ... or not.

Well the thing with a real rhodes is that repeated notes make their own unique (weird) sound due to there only being a single tine for each note and also the fact thgat the tine is moving when its rehit.. If that note was played repeatedly on a sampler it would sound "perfect" or the same everytime. Some people don't like this rhodes artifact, I love it and hear it on all the old 70s recordings...

[bitdump]

Well the Rhoads is unique. Squishing it into a rompler on one level is sort of like buying a Fiat and saying they own part of ferrari, thus you own a ferrari.

 

Not gonna really work.

 

With that, Fiat has the ability to make a dam fine car that will cost less, consume less, be easier to park anywhere with out having to worry too much about it and be less painful on the wallet particularly in the insurance department.

 

That my friends is your rompler.

 

Both are just fine, but there is a difference.

[jeffbayson]

Originally posted by Superbobus:

Has anyone tried running a Rhodes/Wurly through a POD? I have been considering getting a POD XT for this very purpose. I would run the electric piano through the POD and a pre, then into my DAW. I would assume the POD could give you the wide range of sounds you're looking for (via combinations of amp models and effects), without losing that authentic Rhodes sound - but then again, I'm only speculating.

I have the original POD and I must say, it ROCKS. But... it needs a good volume output setting, otherwise the noise is too much. I don't care about a little noise though, it's part of that old feeling.

Dave, I'm on. But the test has to include playing a note from soft to loud gradually and at least one loud sustained chord. This is where all samples I heard have failed so far.

 

Soulstars

I went to a music store in lower Manhattan on Saturday, asked to plug the POD XT into one of their Rhodes EPs, and jammed for a half hour or so. I bought it.

[Superbobus]

Well the Rhoads is unique. Squishing it into a rompler on one level is sort of like buying a Fiat and saying they own part of ferrari, thus you own a ferrari.

Not gonna really work.

With that, Fiat has the ability to make a dam fine car that will cost less, consume less, be easier to park anywhere with out having to worry too much about it and be less painful on the wallet particularly in the insurance department.

That my friends is your rompler.

Both are just fine, but there is a difference.

Apart from the fact that a ROMpler will never lose its brake discs (we had this with a Fiat!), there's another thing you should check out. It's the Lounge Lizard and I'm very impressed with it. It's not a rompler, but a software app that uses physical modelling techniques (can somebody explain what this means?). Sounds much better than the best romplers out there. Still I'll keep on driving my Ferrari, ehhh... playing my Rhodes because I still haven't found a controller with the right feel to replace it.

Eljefe, congrats on your purchase!

 

Soulstars

[Infusion]

Running a Rhodes through a POD?

The POD is a great device no doubt and I have one. I use it for visiting guitarists. But I don't think the POD can do a real rhodes justice. It's an effects box, not a quality preamp. If you want to preserve the Rhodes sound in all it's glory, get a really really good preamp. I know everybodies budget is different, so I'll refrain from making preamp suggestions. A rhodes needs a clean, powerful preamp to amplify, so it can breath and sound through.