rhodes

[Mr.Scarbee]

Thanks LearJeff,

I did a lot to make it playable BEFORE I sampled it.
I did all known modifications (for faster action) and also "shimmed" it (adjusting left right andgle) so that it was even playable (easy to hit harder) in both bass and treble zone.
I also did the adjustment of tines and pickup so it was set to factory "ideal" setting.

It would have been a nightmare to sample it if it had been in bad shape or unplayable.

[learjeff]

Sascha Franck,

Glad you like the samples. (You too, papatomany -- thanks for starting this thread!)

I agree that it doesn't bark quite like I'd like it to. That's a result of my rush job and not sweating the details. I think due to normalization and not adjusting the EQ for the various samples, the bite seems weaker than it does when I play my rhodes.

If I sample again, I'll use more velocity layers at the low end and fewer at the top. For example, after normalization, my samples at the very top sound pretty much the same for FF as for PP (except the S/N ratio is higher for the FF ones). There might be some hammer sound difference too, but not nearly as much as I'd expect. So I might use just one v-layer for the top notes, and take more and more velicities as I go down the keyboard, ending with at least 6 at the bottom. This set has 3 layers for the top half and 4 for the bottom.

Furthermore, I'll hit the keys harder for the loudest samples, and get quite a bit more bark. It's definitely a part of the sound I love, and these samples don't do it justice.

[Sascha Franck]

Jeff, what about sampling it through an amp? Would that be possible?
Dunno if you even have one, but from my experience, many Rhodes live up quite a bit when being played through an amp, possibly through a VERY slightly driven one, such as a black panel Fender Twin or so.
IMO such things are kinda part of the famous sounds we all love so much - don't we?

[Sascha Franck]

Forgot to say: Playing Rhodes through an amp (preferably a tube one) often results in some sorta very organic compression (which IMO most simulations don't deliver), plus it might even offer some overtones that weren't there before. Sure, a guitar amp isn't full ranged at all - but then, that's just what I love with Rhodes. Gives them some sort of oldfashioned, lively feel.

[egbert]

Forgot to say: Playing Rhodes through an amp (preferably a tube one) often results in some sorta very organic compression (which IMO most simulations don't deliver), plus it might even offer some overtones that weren't there before. Sure, a guitar amp isn't full ranged at all - but then, that's just what I love with Rhodes. Gives them some sort of oldfashioned, lively feel.

You can also blend the direct outputs with a miced amp - as with Elec bass (DI and Amp)

Eg

[AudioWhore]

I recently bought a real 1976 mk1 stage 73 rhodes after not being able to achieve a particular rhodes sound with software/samples.. Tried many amp sims and many samples. I have the Line 6 guitar port as well. There is a certain natural inconsistant ringyness that shows up especially when you use a crybaby. I dunno, maybe i have a fussy ear for tone but it is a sound that really answers all your questions

For many situations samples do just fine. Depends on the style of music I guess.

[Stupid American Pig]

My stage 73 MkI is also a '76 model- and the action on mine needs work(its still very playable, but its alittle bit heavy) I still use sampled rhodes quite a bit though, mainly when composing. After I have a part worked out, I then go back and play it on the real thing and try out different efx...

[learjeff]

Sure, a good tube amp warms it up nicely. But my "studio nook" is in a section of the oddly shaped living room in my old house, with wood floors and plaster walls. I get a great sound recording acoustic guitar and vocals, but every recording attempt I've made with a miked amp gets too much room. So, while that's a very valid option and would lead to some great sounding samples, I won't be the one doing it.

You can, however, feed the output from your soundcard into an amp and get a nice sound.

[AudioWhore]

Yeah might be easier to just get a nice cheap DI/mic pre like the behringer tube mic100 and run it through NI Guitar rig. Get a good soud if you fiddle with the amp and mic settings and make your own presets. I've spent many hours just sitting there configuring nice sounds for use with my rhodes

[learjeff]

Sure, just buy me a copy of Guitar Rig!

[Syncopator]

For those who don't mind spending the bucks: Native Instruments' Eletrik Piano.

http://www.nativeinstruments.de/index.p ... ikpiano_us

It's killer.

[topaz]

what about this (unconfirmed problem) ?

http://www.native-instruments.com/forum ... adid=14190

For those who don't mind spending the bucks: Native Instruments' Eletrik Piano.

http://www.nativeinstruments.de/index.p ... ikpiano_us

It's killer.

[Pantsdown666]

Here it is, 6MB. Needs work, not nearly the even playability of Scarbee. But it's close enough to the sound I learned to love almost 30 years ago (if you add a little pitch shift doubling or mild chorus).

=> jRhodes1.sfpack

hey Jeff -
Any chance of putting up a version other than sfpack (e.g. zip / rar) so that Mac users can try your Rhodes too?
Thanks!

[learjeff]

Zip isn't a good choice because it doesn't compress audio. Not sure what RAR would do with a soundfont file -- if it doesn't recognize that it's audio, it won't compress it well either. (Plus I don't have WinRAR, I'd have to buy it ... though it's worth the price for a number of reasons.)

Anyone know of a free soundfont compression prog that's supported on both Win and Mac? I don't have room to post a 46MB file. I'll try posting this question as a new thread.

[learjeff]

No need for a new thread. sfArk is supported on Mac

Find it here:

http://melodymachine.com/sfark.htm

So I've posted my soundfont as sfArk.

jRhodes1.sfArk