I agree: it is NOT the original sound... of course it is usable like I find usable even the electric pianos included in the Plugsounds for example... almost every sample finds its use...
Frankly, Nick, I feel you should pay a bit more attention before starting such a thread.
Everybody should know here how much you are \'linked\' to NI but it would be much better to let the readers know that you MIGHT be a bit biased [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
I don\'t think you can compare NI EP and the Scarbee libraries.
The NI EP is fine as an easy, convenient way to access vintage keyboard sounds of pretty good quality. It doesn\'t quite sound or play like the real thing, but in a mix the Rhodes and Wurli work ok. The Clav doesn\'t really do much for me I have to say.
The Scarbee keyboards are quite simply in a league of their own in terms of sound quality, playability, tonal authenticity - they basically ARE the real thing. I don\'t know of another developer who has consistantly delivered such amazingly high quality, without exception.
I must admit I\'m kind of surprised to hear Nick bigg\'ing up NI prodcuts so publically, partly because the quality is patently not comparable to the Scarbee libraries, and partly because I assume QL/EW have very close relations with NI.
And I give my vote to R.S.P. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] I have owned 5 \"real\" Rhodes over the years, and Scarbee\'s library is very authentic, and captures the soul of my old Rhodes....
I just cant wait to get the Vintage NFX happenening (hint,hint Thomas [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img])
I was in a recording studio last week and I played on my Scarbee samples and on the real thing present in the studio. The soundman with years and years of experience told me they differ very little. And that man really preferred all things analog to digital stuff (and I can\'t really argue with that, except for R.S.P. 73).
That said, the keys of the real thing give a more authentic playing experience, but my Kawai MP9500 actually plays better.
Then there is my own real Rhodes, a 1973 model. It certainly sounds different to Scarbee\'s one and I somehow like it better. It has a more friendly sound. This is probably due to the changes made in the production of the Mark I in 1975. The ageing process also changed the sound of course, but that alone can\'t expain the difference in the sound.
Scarbee, do you think you will ever have time to sample a pre-75 model? I\'ll buy it!
Just for your information: Propellerheads have released the Elektromagnetic-Refill. Registered owners of Reason 2.5 can get it for free at www.propellerheads.se
It\'s got a Rhodes Mark I Tubed, a Mark II, 2 Wurlies (a 100 and a 200 model), a Clavinet D6, a Pianet and some presets of a Hammond A (yes, the old model).
There\'s some very very nice stuff in there, including some great demo-songs and song-templates with nice effects-setups. No, it wasn\'t meant to compete with a Scarbee-library quality-wise - but it\'s a very nice offering by the P-Heads, indeed. And some of the patches - especially from the D6, sampled with 8 velocities and release-samples! - are simply great!
Best wishes,
welldone
No, I don\'t work for Propellerheads (unfortunately), I don\'t get any endorsements (sadly) - I\'m just very pleased with their products. And to give away the 2.5 update for Reason and such a brilliant Refill for free - that\'s unique customer-care to me!
Hey Fishey
Scarbee, do you think you will ever have time to sample a pre-75 model? I\'ll buy it!
[/ QUOTE ]
Don\'t know. I belive the pre \'75 had wooden hammers instead of plastic hammers, but the sound should be almost the same.
Remember that the sound you hear when playing real rhodes is through the tone-control - and probably setting bass boost to middle. (that sound is premade in Giga version too) The raw sound from RSP73 is recorded direct - bypassing tonecontrol - from harp.
In Manual you can make this sound using standard EQ/filter.
In Vintage keyboard FX you can control it as on original Rhodes (plus panning Suitcase tremolo off course)
When using the normal Rhodes output (not direct) you loose a lot of treble - the sparkle and it gives a more mellow sound, and by setting bass boost to 5 you get a more agressive sound. So with these two settings you have the old-school sound.
Scott Kinsey ( http://www.scottkinsey.com )recently was in a studio session with bass legend Matt Garrison working on his new album: \"Live In The Studio\" and wrote this to me:
\"I originally played a real rhodes (Jim Beard\'s 73 BTW) in the studio -
but I broke a tine (an F right in the middle) and had to replace most
of the track with your RSP73... which sounds as good or better to me
than the real one.
There are still bits of the real rhodes in there, here and there -
especially in the solo (the stuff thinned out by a wah wah pedal is the
real one), but overall it\'s mostly your RSP73.\"
He send me the track - and it was impossible to hear what was what...
Also a funny note. On the Rhodes forum (Rhodes purists/experts) a guy had made two identical recordings of a song - one using RSP73 and the other using his Rhodes MK1 88 suitcase.
He made a Poll: guess which is the sample one and which is the real one.
A (real Rhodes) had 12 votes and B (RSP73) had 22 notes [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] So most people thought RSP73 was the real one..
that is exactly my feeling. Your sample is unique and goes totally in-depth (both in terms of samples and in terms of the technical state of the instrument recorded).
I also played the Elektric Piano (in the NI booth at musikmesse) and although the headphones were not that good, I could hear the clear plonky sound Nick mentions.
Maybe that is a good thing in certain situations... but it\'s not really my cup of tea. I prefer your samples as they reflect the actual sound better and they have a far better dynamic response.
Cheers,
Michiel, that\'s exactly what I thought when I first heard the completed sample set.
I have vivid memories of going to the Fender warehouse here in Sydney when I was working at a keyboard store in the 70s. We\'d play through piano after piano after piano until our ears were tired, looking for the ones which required the LEAST repair and setup to make them OK instruments. What was sad was that so many of them came all this way from the factory in really bad condition. Sometimes I was tempted to believe that Fender dumped their \'Friday\' pianos on us poor aussies [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
The thing that blows me away about the RSP73 is that it\'s like we\'ve had the piano set up better than any tech had ever done - and then frozen the mechanics so that they could never deteriorate! In the 70\'s that was a pipe dream, and now Scarbee\'s made it reality.
I\'m just glad that I\'ve been around long enough to really appreciate how much this new technology is giving us.
I agree: it is NOT the original sound... of course it is usable like I find usable even the electric pianos included in the Plugsounds for example... almost every sample finds its use...
Frankly, Nick, I feel you should pay a bit more attention before starting such a thread.
Everybody should know here how much you are \'linked\' to NI but it would be much better to let the readers know that you MIGHT be a bit biased [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Kindest regards,
Simone Coen
[/ QUOTE ]
There is no joy left for me, it seems. I like talking about samples. I can\'t talk about most, because of my competing products. I figure I am safe with pianos. Read what I said. I wouldn\'t exactly call it a rave review for NI\'s instrument. I just really like their 76 key MK1 as an alternate Rhodes sound. This doesn\'t have to be a with us or against us thing. I have always praised Scarbee\'s stuff with much enthusiasm. Take a deep breath and don\'t worry about it. Don\'t make the mistake of accusing me of bias, it\'s not there. We license NI\'s engine. But saying that the NI piano is not the original sound is a little naive. It sounds more like an old MK1 through a bright amp than Scarbee\'s does. Without all the detailed velocities ofcourse. Is that good? I kind of like it as an alternate Rhodes sound. Maybe because I had one like that.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks