Compact all-in-one boards, 2021 edition

[AnotherScott]

The XK5 has never held any appeal for me. Sounds great, but the features that drive up its price are ones I don't care about.

I've never played one, but many seem to think it's the best feeling organ action you'll find in any portable board. And it does have beautiful classic aesthetics, which matters to some. But yeah, it's pricey, and heavy... and of course, all wrong for the task at hand, since it's just an organ and you need an "all in one."

 

As for the NS3, even apart from it being an octave longer than I want, it wouldn't be a serious contender. While I understand their utility, I just find them utterly uninspiring to play, no matter how good the piano sounds out front.

Then that might be one of the biggest question marks you'll have to deal with, since the SK Pro uses a version of the same Fatar TP/8O action that Nord uses. It may be sprung differently, it won't have the aftertouch, the velocity mapping may be different... hopefully it crosses to the right side of your "uninspiring to play" threshold. Otherwise you may still end up back at your YC61/Vox possibilities. Or maybe the Kurzweil PC4-7 I mentioned.

 

The PC4-7 doesn't have the immediacy in its interface that the SK Pro, YC61, Vox, Nord, or VR09 have. And it's organ is not going be as good as the SK Pro. But I think it actually meets all your other criteria. The closest call is probably whether its organ is better than the YC61, and even though Kurz doesn't have my favorite rotary either, there are numerous variations, and I think odds are good you'll find a rotary preferable to Yamaha's. Also, now that you're not totally ruling out an add-on (based on your YC61/iPad comment), the Kurz has assignable outs, so unlike on the Yamaha (or Vox), it is very feasible/easy to put a Mini Vent on it, without any performance complications. In fact, there's enough free panel space that you could leave it permanently velcro'd to the PC4-7, and with right-angle audio jacks (in and out of the Kurz), I think you can safely leave it permanently wired up as well, so it wouldn't have to feel like an "add-on" at all, except for having to connect its AC. Except that leaves your rotary speed switch in an awkward spot, at the top right of your keyboard. So you'd want to also connect the remote footswitch for it. Which I guess you could say is yet one more thing to attach, but then, so is a rotary foot switch for I think any of the others, which is something I'd personally want to connect regardless of where the front panel control for rotary speed was. Okay, yeah, it's got that extra octave of keys you'd rather avoid (and then some), but it's not as bad as it could be, because its wheels are above the keys. Its 46.5" width still ends up at 7" more than the 61-key SK Pro, though. OTOH, at 19.5 lbs, it weighs a pound LESS than the 61-key SK Pro.

 

With organ as your priority and no desire for more than 61 keys, I still think the SK Pro is your board of choice. But if you find its action as uninspiring as Nord's, the Kurz is one more you could consider.

[AnotherScott]

Oh, as for the Nord split points, that's been discussed to death, but as it happens--and kind of related to the earlier discussion of wanting an organ's high note to be a C--the only time I've wished for an unavailable split point was to include the high C for organ, and exclude everything above, e.g. to use a few high keys for custom samples while not taking that C away from the organ.

 

I appreciate the value of the LED split indicators, which presumably plays into their choice of fixed options. Maybe in the next gen, they can borrow an idea from Native Instruments and put LEDs over *every* key so they can indicate split points wherever you want them.

[MathOfInsects]

I don't think the issue is really the folks who don't want different split points, but the mounds of people who do. For me it's like finding out your dream woman is mildly racist. Like, we can work with the rest, but damn I wish I didn't know this about you. I don't understand the market calculation around it. Not a single soul will stop buying Nords they day they fix this, and it will almost certainly result in new sales they otherwise aren't getting.

[Cabo]

I just got the Sk Pro a few weeks ago and have had the Nord Stage 3 for several years. I'm actually a bit disappointed in the Sk Pro. I had expected more improvements over the SK-1.

 

The organ is a step up from both the Hammond SK-1 and Nord, but the other non-organ sounds are really disappointing. Pianos and E Pianos -- seem not much better than SK-1, which is not good. There's one particular transition between key samples on the Rhodes which drives me nuts. For other sounds (sampled, synth), my Nord just sounds way better. Also, the Sk Pro interface (and manual) is confusing. It takes a lot of button presses to do simple stuff.

 

I like the mono synth idea, but I didn't realize how much I use aftertouch on the Nord, plus the Nord synth is so much deeper (and is poly). Key beds are both very similar (except for the aftertouch). I've never run into a problem with the split point issue. Also, there's so much real time control on the Nord.

 

If I need a lightweight, one-board solution to cover all bases, it's still the Nord for me.

[AnotherScott]

I'm leaning toward replacing my NS3 with the SK Pro, but I haven't gotten my hands on one yet so it's too soon to be sure. The things I'd miss most would probably be the aftertouch and easy custom sample loading. I do not expect the SK to compete with Nord on piano (though one facebook poster--who I think is here too, but I forget his name--said he actually preferred the Hammond piano to the Nord)... but I have pretty wide latitude in what I consider acceptable in my live piano sound, and moreover, it is highly unlikely that I'd have the Hammond at any gig where I didn't have something else for piano anyway. The SK just looks to have a lot of advantages for my particular usages, even though it obviously doesn't do all the Nord does.

 

As far as taking a lot of button presses to do simple stuff... well, there are a lot of menus you can dive through... but it looks like it has a cool feature where you can take the ten menu screens you need to get to most often, and assign them to the ten Favorite buttons (using the Shift key). I figure there probably aren't more than ten screens I'd need to get to frequently (likely even fewer), so if I can get to the ones I most care about with essentially a single direct button press, that should address having to frequently do a lot of navigation.

 

Can you give an example of where the Nord synth is so much deeper?

 

Nord does have more real time control, but I think mostly when it comes to effects, which happens to not be a priority for me.

[Josh Paxton]

Here's an unexpected plot twist: it turns out I'll be able to get an SK Pro at a far more affordable price if I wait for a bit â and by "a bit" I mean "longer than I want to wait to replace the VR." So as an interim step, I've just ordered a Vox Conti from a place with a generous return policy. I'll see how I like it, and reevaluate from there.

 

"But Josh," some of you with ridiculous memories and/or stalker tendencies might say, "didn't you already own one of those and send it back?" And the answer is, yes I did. But I got it for a completely different purpose, for which it turned out to be totally unsuited because I hadn't done my homework; I got the 73-key one as an EP-centric lower board, thinking it had a hammer action. I remember thinking at the time, "This would make a great all-in-one board if I needed one, but I don't." So this definitely won't replace my Mojo 61 as my "serious organ" board, but for situations when good enough is good enough, I expect it will be more than good enough.

 

Also, while the topic of Nord split points has been discussed many times, I'll never pass up an opportunity to state that I am firmly in the "it's deal-breakingly idiotic, and their 'width' parameter is a stupid and inadequate solution to a problem that should never have existed" camp.

[Adan]

My definition of "all-in-one" includes the ability to split with independent octave and expression pedal controls per split side. The Conti doesn't do that, but if you only are called on to play one sound at a time, it could be a great one board gig rig. The organ isn't the most authentic but from a tactile standpoint it feels really good.

 

I've contemplated several times getting another Conti. It's always the lack of split functionality that stops me from placing that order. That, and the fact that Fleer has bought them all.

[MathOfInsects]

Also, while the topic of Nord split points has been discussed many times, I'll never pass up an opportunity to state that I am firmly in the "it's deal-breakingly idiotic, and their 'width' parameter is a stupid and inadequate solution to a problem that should never have existed" camp.

 

The width parameter is actually pretty cool. The width parameter being seen by them as a means to address this completely unnecessary hill to die on? Clueless. It's the "let's Sharpie Alabama into this" of tech solutions.

[AnotherScott]

Sounds like a plan!

 

I know you'd rather not use attachments, but for the odd time you might be willing to (i.e. it could spare you from bringing a second board), take a look at Post #3052225 and the two posts that follow it at https://forums.musicplayer.com/ubbthreads.php/topics/3052225/re-super-light-2-board-rigs#Post3052225 about using the Vox with an iPad (or now that VB3m is out, even an iPhone).I haven't needed to try this myself (not having had any gigs since then) but it should nicely shore up a Vox weakness. Plus there's plenty of free panel space on the Vox to make use of anyway. :-) But since the Vox does not have an audio input, that might kill it for you, if it necessitates adding a mixer.

 

The Vox is the smallest, lightest board I find really enjoyable to play, though.

[MathOfInsects]

FWIW, I played a Conti in the beforetimes, completely willing to fall in love, and went home alone to my Swedish Ice Queen. You know what they say: different split points for different hip joints.

[Adan]

FWIW, I played a Conti in the beforetimes, completely willing to fall in love, and went home alone to my Swedish Ice Queen. You know what they say: different split points for different hip joints.

 

Have I told you lately that your persistent analogizing of keyboards to objects of sexual desire is a little disturbing? This is just out of concern for your general welfare!

[David Emm]

FWIW, I played a Conti in the beforetimes, completely willing to fall in love, and went home alone to my Swedish Ice Queen. You know what they say: different split points for different hip joints.

 

Have I told you lately that your persistent analogizing of keyboards to objects of sexual desire is a little disturbing? This is just out of concern for your general welfare!

 

I don't find it disturbing in the usual sense due to its specificity. If I had a Fairlight for every Synth Boner I've hosted over the years, I'd have an airplane hangar packed to the roof with Fairlights.

[MathOfInsects]

FWIW, I played a Conti in the beforetimes, completely willing to fall in love, and went home alone to my Swedish Ice Queen. You know what they say: different split points for different hip joints.

 

Have I told you lately that your persistent analogizing of keyboards to objects of sexual desire is a little disturbing? This is just out of concern for your general welfare!

My Swedish Ice Queen never says anything like that to me.

 

Plus she has after-touch.

[Rally]

I don't think the issue is really the folks who don't want different split points, but the mounds of people who do. For me it's like finding out your dream woman is mildly racist. Like, we can work with the rest, but damn I wish I didn't know this about you. I don't understand the market calculation around it. Not a single soul will stop buying Nords they day they fix this, and it will almost certainly result in new sales they otherwise aren't getting.

 

 

That is a darn good analogy, eventually those circumstances will wear you down. The wording reminded of something, then I remembered. The character Princeton in the Broadway show 'Avenue Q' sang, "Everyone's A Little Bit Racist". A really good tune. And I guess every all in one keyboard is gonna be a little bit something off the mark.

[ajstan]

With respect to split points, I find the indicator lights indispensable. 90%+ of my programs have some sort of split (many with two split points) and there is no way I'm going to remember where they all are without the lights. Of the hundred or so programs I've created, the fixed split points have been an issue on maybe three, with all being solved by creating a second program for the part of the song that required the extra keys.

 

Removing the lights in order to have 87 potential split points would be a huge negative for me and I don't see the value in drilling 77 more holes in the chassis to add 77 more lights for what I find to be an infrequent issue. YMMV. Maybe there's a technology or set of components out there that would make this feasible from a cost, manufacturing, and reliability perspective, but until then, I think split points between B/C and E/F are imminently workable.

 

I totally get it if a feature set doesn't fit someone else's requirements, but it doesn't make a manufacturer incompetent, idiotic, or malevolent as a result.

[AnotherScott]

I agree about the value of the lights. As I mentioned, NI has put LEDs over every key, which addresses this. But even without doing that and just sticking within the current hardware (which would potentially permit implementation via a software rather than hardware change), they could do something like have the light be solid when it indicates the exact split point, and have it flash when it is only indicating "approximately" where the split point is. Like oscillator tuning, they could even have it flash more slowly when it is close, and more quickly when it is farther off. If someone didn't like flashing lights, of course, they would not have to use it and the board would function just as it does now, but for people who want an over-ride, they would have a way to do it, and the front panel would still never be presenting "wrong" information, which I think Nord would understandably want to avoid. And they've actually taken a step in this direcion by shifting the color of the LED depending on the crossfade width.

[stoken6]

Does anyone use the crossfade splits that Nord provided? My splits are typically something like: a square-wave monosynth over two octaves, then an octave of Rhodes shifted up 12 semitones, then a brass section for the remainder. I might wish for a specific split point that is not between two white notes, but I never, ever want a crossfade between brass and Rhodes.

 

Cheers, Mike.

[stoken6]

Does anyone use the crossfade splits that Nord provided? My splits are typically something like: a square-wave monosynth over two octaves, then an octave of Rhodes shifted up 12 semitones, then a brass section for the remainder. I might wish for a specific split point that is not between two white notes, but I never, ever want a crossfade between brass and Rhodes.

 

Cheers, Mike.

[ajstan]

I agree about the value of the lights. As I mentioned, NI has put LEDs over every key, which addresses this. But even without doing that and just sticking within the current hardware (which would potentially permit implementation via a software rather than hardware change), they could do something like have the light be solid when it indicates the exact split point, and have it flash when it is only indicating "approximately" where the split point is. Like oscillator tuning, they could even have it flash more slowly when it is close, and more quickly when it is farther off. If someone didn't like flashing lights, of course, they would not have to use it and the board would function just as it does now, but for people who want an over-ride, they would have a way to do it, and the front panel would still never be presenting "wrong" information, which I think Nord would understandably want to avoid. And they've actually taken a step in this direcion by shifting the color of the LED depending on the crossfade width.

I missed the mention of the NI LightGuide. Looks cool. It would be interesting to see how that type of implementation (it appears to be backlit through a translucent covering, but I could be mistaken) could be adapted for the metal chassis of the Nord, and if it's bright enough for outdoor use.

 

I really like the concept of using the existing light locations via flashing (or even additional colors) to indicate a split point other than the 10 fixed locations. It seems like it's something worth suggesting to Clavia if it's specific enough. The spec would have to address whether the split was to the left or right of the light. I suppose that if the existing LEDs were capable of a fourth color, then the lights on either side of the split point could change to the fourth color or flash, and if it was below F2 or above B6 just the one light could change to the fourth color or flash. There would be other spec items to consider such as if the system would allow multiple split points between a single pair of lights and how the LEDs would indicate that type of situation. As you noted, maybe there could be a system setting to enable/disable the all-key split points so only those who want it can turn it on and it would not affect anyone who wants to use it the way it is.

[ajstan]

Does anyone use the crossfade splits that Nord provided? My splits are typically something like: a square-wave monosynth over two octaves, then an octave of Rhodes shifted up 12 semitones, then a brass section for the remainder. I might wish for a specific split point that is not between two white notes, but I never, ever want a crossfade between brass and Rhodes.

 

Cheers, Mike.

I don't. I think the crossfade is probably more useful when the octaves are not shifted for adjacent sections, such as a piano with a bass below, or a horn section with high strings above.

[AnotherScott]

Does anyone use the crossfade splits that Nord provided?

I actually did find it valuable for one setup I played with... but unflatteringly to Nord, its purpose was to overcome something else that they don't do well. The clonewheel sound on the Nord Stage 3 is shy on bass in its lower octaves. You can't simply boost the bass overall, because that throws the tone of the whole thing off. So I assigned my main organ all across the keyboard as usual on Panel A, but then I set up a second organ on panel B, split to cover the range of the bottom up to F3, with a gradual fadeout by setting the crossfade parameter to 12. Using just the lowest drawbars on that sound, and the EQ to boost the bass full up, that gave me the big bottom I was looking for when I needed it, and with the crossfade, there was no abrupt transition point between the sounds, just a smooth progressively added bottom as I moved down the keys.

 

I never, ever want a crossfade between brass and Rhodes.

Conceptually, I get that. But many players find that they occasionally accidentally cross split points while playing (especially when players aren't even trying to play the exact same parts every time they play a song). This also is one of the reasons I prefer gigging with two keyboards rather than heavily relying on splitting one. But let's say that you have a brass/Rhodes split, and you accidentally play a note that is just a step or two outside your pre-specified range. What's worse... getting the entirely wrong sound at full volume? or getting *mostly* the right sound but a little bit of the wrong one?

 

That said, if you want to take advantage of that protection, you have to set your splits up accordingly. You wouldn't set your split points at the *exact* notes you expect to define where you'll play a part, but rather, you intentionally build a "buffer area" into your defined regions. So you'd still have a brass region and a rhodes region, but each extends beyond any note you'd actually *intend* to play. You can then make sure that all those "pre-intended" parts are fully one sound or the other, but there is a buffer in between that protects you from disaster if you slightly stray while playing either part. IOW, taking advantage of this feature in this manner requires a bit of rethinking in how you approach setting your split points in the first place. However, this does mean you have to have the "keys to spare" between your two parts, that you can afford to lose them to a buffer zone.

 

Another place this could come into play--and it's not ideal, but it may sometimes be your best choice out of poor options--is if you have to do a split and there are simply not enough keys to fully cover the two parts you need to be playing. If you ever did a split and wished you could have just a few more keys at the top of your bottom sound, or a few more keys at the bottom of your top sound, usually your options are to slightly alter the part you play so that it fits in the desired range, or assemble a bunch of consecutive quick patch changes. But if you have, say, a piano+organ split, it may not be the worst thing in the world to have the last few notes of your piano run doubled by a bit of organ, or the last few notes of your organ run doubled by some piano. Even though you're hearing a little of the "wrong" sound come in on these notes, your ear will almost certainly be more attuned to the sound that is the continuation of the line you were in the middle of playing. You'll be adding a little "noise" so to speak, but it will not be dissonant, and may be less of an obvious "deviation" than if you were to play an alternate part, and it also may be more comfortable/practical than employing a series of patch changes to cover each sound in full by itself as you need it. (Again, I'd say use a second board, but some people are tied to using just one.)

 

I thnk crossfading really is a clever and potentially useful feature. It just doesn't totally negate the need for being able to set different split points. And fully definable split points doesn't solve the problems this feature solves, either. I think that instead of looking at these as competing features (two ways to handle the same problem), you really need to look at them as two completely different features that are good at different things, and it would be useful to have both.

[MathOfInsects]

The LED's are helpful. I like not having to make a note of where I split a particular patch, which (life hack) I usually make part of the patch name.

 

I do use the width setting. On the Compact, there's not that much real estate to work with, so (as Another Scott describes) there are a fair number of times where I want the buffer/insurance policy for overrunning either end of the span. Of course that wouldn't be the case if you're reserving an octave for horns or something, but it's often the case if one of your zones is something you might solo on, or otherwise go rogue/freestyle.

 

So, sure. LED's are great, width is great.

 

That doesn't mean split points aren't still a vile and unforgivable affront to the soul of humankind, which must be extinguished for the good of our future human/Swedish-borg hybrid offspring.

[stoken6]

When I gig my Nord, it's almost always with a lower hammer-action controller playing AP or EP across the full compass. I often need two or three other sounds split across the Nord itself, and 73 keys tends to be enough. The Nord can't do many more splits in any event, so that's the limitation rather than the real estate itself. But MoI +1 fully definable split points aren't hard and are often useful - I've frequently had to move an entire part an octave away (and therefore harder to reach/can't play across the split point with one hand etc.) simply because the split I need is half a step away from what Nord gives me.

 

Cheers, Mike.

[MathOfInsects]

I've frequently had to move an entire part an octave away (and therefore harder to reach/can't play across the split point with one hand etc.) simply because the split I need is half a step away from what Nord gives me.

That's the exact circumstance I hate the fixed split points for, and it comes up magically often. Some five-note essential riff will cross over the split points, and now I have to give it an extra octave's worth of real estate just to play the part.

[Josh Paxton]

This saga ended up taking another unexpected twist. When I said I had ordered a Vox Conti, what I meant was that I emailed my "guy" and said "Hey, I want to order a Vox Conti." But in the time it took him to get back to me, I read this extremely helpful post above:

 

My definition of "all-in-one" includes the ability to split with independent octave and expression pedal controls per split side. The Conti doesn't do that [...]

 

I had forgotten about that limitation. Like Adan, I would have found it to be a deal breaker for what I'll need from this board. So thanks, Adan, for saving me from that headache! Anyway, at the last minute I went with a YC61 instead, fully intending to bite the bullet of convenience somewhat and use my iPad or phone for organ sounds.

 

It got here yesterday. I set it up and dug into it, and the most surprising thing happened: I liked the built-in organ sounds. I mean, they're certainly not SK Pro pr VB3 quality, but in person they sound a lot better to me than they do in any online demo I've heard. I'd say they're at least as good as anything I was ever able to coax out of the VR09. The fast Leslie is still the weak point, but for the context I'll be using it in, it'll do just fine. And I'm surprised by how good the overdrive sounds. That was my first big criticism of the board when it came out, because it sounded harsh and brittle in the demos. I don't know if they've improved it since then, or if it's just another case of the real thing sounding different than online clips.

 

With the rest of the sounds I pretty much knew what I was getting from having spent time with a CP88 in a music store, and I find them all pretty damn good. The pianos are quite nice, the EPs are competitive by modern standards, ands the synths and other sounds are well done and offer as much variety and editability as I'll need. Part of me thinks I'll miss the deep editing capabilities of the VR09's VA synth, but then the rational part of me kicks in and reminds me that I haven't actually used it for years now, since I got the handful of sounds I needed dialed in.

 

In short, after spending a day with it, I'm happier and more excited about this board than I expected to be. I'll be spending today getting my setups together, and then breaking it in on a gig tomorrow (weather permitting). Will report back with how it goes.

[drawback]

I liked the built-in organ sounds just fine. I mean, they're certainly not SK Pro pr VB3 quality, but in person they sound a lot better to me than they do in any online demo I've heard. I'd say they're at least as good as anything I was ever able to coax out of the VR09. The fast Leslie is still the weak point, but for the context I'll be using it in, it'll do just fine.

 

Not every organ has to sound like a B3, or even the Big 3. Sometimes your expression needs to use whatever voice is at hand, sometimes it strikes a chord in people, and the result is classic.

[AnotherScott]

Anyway, at the last minute I went with a YC61 instead, fully intending to bite the bullet of convenience somewhat and use my iPad or phone for organ sounds.

 

It got here yesterday. I set it up and dug into it, and the most surprising thing happened: I liked the built-in organ sounds just fine.

Who would have thought? The board meeting the "better-than-YC61 organ/Leslie" criteria ended up being a YC61! ;-)

[Doerfler]

Who would have thought? The board meeting the "better-than-YC61 organ/Leslie" criteria ended up being a YC61! ;-)

 

just another day at KC

 

this proves that no matter how many demos we listen to online or how many opinions we get from each other, until we try "that" keyboard in person, we won't know for sure.

[stoken6]

We got a Hollywood-style plot twist in act 3! We just need a jump-cut montage of Josh transferring his sounds over, an epic battle at sunset in rain and thunder, and close with a wide shot of the audience in adulation at Josh's gig.

 

Cheers, Mike.

[Adan]

Did not see this plot twist coming. It's like if the pizza guy shows up and then everyone just sits down and eats pizza.

 

I've been of the opinion that the YC organ has been getting a bit of a bad rap. If authenticity is your sole measure, then the Leslie sim is certainly flawed, and Leslie fast is a bit harsh even putting authenticity aside. But as to the rest of the sound, they got it very right. Overall I find it very musical, and I doubt even 1 % in the audience will think it sounds anything but great. As an all-in-one board, it's a big step up from the VR, and it's arguably best in class on the piano side.