I didn't want to hijack DNJ's post highlighting the Roland Bk9 (Blues Shuffle), so I thought I'd post an example of the REAL DEAL. I suppose an arranger can do a fair job imitating the 'Hammond' sound IN ISOLATION, same with guitar. But 'in the trenches' as Donny would say, it just doesn't have the power and dynamics of a real Hammond or even a TOTL clonewheel. The problem with the guitar emulation is mainly the player, as few can capture the playing technique of a first rate guitarist. I'm posting the following video as an example of what I'm talking about, especially as it pertains to "the Blues", one of my favorite art forms and especially when done by a REAL bluesman. I know there are some that won't get this but for those of you that like authentic down-in-the-dirt gutbucket blues performed by two masters (Lucky Peterson and Rico McFarland), this should be a real treat. Use headsets or good monitors to get the full effect of the organ.

chas

Video doesn't work......you have to go to the source clik the you tube logo,...that said,......the one thing the arranger KB like the BK9 has over what you see in this video is portability and surly good enough to cover most jobs easily ....I doubt anyone is gonna carry a B3 into a nursing home or 99% of the gigs OMB players play at........otherwise it was enjoyable watching this.

Thanks, I'll try to correct the video. However, you missed the point of my post. Who said anything about OMB's or Nursing homes. I'm talking about how arrangers match up to the real thing and why 'pro's' use the real thing.

Here is a link that should work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3v0LECHDKk

chas

Donny is right on this one. I can't imagine trucking around a B3 and a Leslie and a PAS to play for one hour at a NH or retirement gig. I will, in the near future, be taking out my Hammond SK1-73 and a BK7m and a compact PAS for those jobs. I foresee the Hammond SK holding its own in that arena. As stated before, the only downside too such a setup are the extra cords and equipment not needed with a good MOTL arranger. Roland drawbars are very good and I must say my Yamaha s950 DBs do a decent job.

All that said, if you go back to the video and maybe look at some similar videos, I would be willing to bet that those same artists could easily hold their own with today's Hammonds, Nords, Rolands and a few other dedicated drawbar clones.

No Cass, Donny is NOT right, because his reply has absolutely nothing to do with the point I was trying to make. But forget about it 'cause obviously you're only going to respond to the interpretation you want to give it. I wasn't judging an instrument based on how it works for you in a OMB or Nursing Home setting. I was talking about how one sounds vs the other. Look, I'm not trying to be snarky here. For a solo performer, unless one is a very skilled and talented pianist, I'd be the first to say that an arranger keyboard is probably best suited for the job. But I also believe that we can get so used to the sound of something that we start to think that that is the norm. It's not. Sometimes we need to listen to the real thing and the dynamics of live play to remind us that there is another level to aspire to. Nobody is suggesting that you haul a B3/Leslie into a nursing home for a 1hr gig; that's ludicrous (although there was a time when people did it). I'm just saying don't get complacent in the fact that an arranger keyboard is the be-all, end-all of musical instruments. In my view, it's a good substitute where the 'real thing' or multiple players is impractical BUT a poor substitute when that's not the case. JMO.

chas

You don't "play" a Hammond B-3...you "ride" it. Clones, even by Hammond, just don't have the mass of a real B-3...it feels almost indestructible and doing smears and two handed climbs and squabbles just feel better on the genuine article, so the player tends to dig in more aggressively and freely than when playing the lighter clones.

I can do rhythmic chops on a B-3 with much more freedom than on a clone, as I know I'm not going to break anything.

Also, the inconsistency of a well broken in B-3 is very hard to simulate accurately, although digital organs are getting closer, and where the latter usually fall down is in the exactness of the chorus/vibrato.

Also, the deal breaker for me on clones is the rotary speaker, as nothing sounds like a Leslie honkin', and snortin' and breathin'...yes the Ventilator comes very, very close, but still doesn't nail it as far as I'm concerned. We used one on the B-3 I jam on, and the Leslie 147 still trumps it. I also tried the Ventilator on my Tyros4's drawbar organs, and it really lifts them into another area of realism, but playing the Tyros4 into a Leslie preamp and into the 147 sounds even better.

A 425 lb Hammond B-3 requires either roadies or at least three other very understanding and strong bandmates, and although the strap on dollies/handles are very nice to have (and pretty much a necessity), any venue without a ramp or elevator will soon become the one you hate to play at.

It really is the King of Instruments in my opinion. As I said in another thread, if I could play organ as well as you, Chas, I'd have to have a real B-3 and nothing else, but since organ sounds to do not feature as much in my arranger music, I can get by just fine with what's in my Tyros4.

I love this performance by Billy Preston who really does some creative licks on his Hammond. These are the slides and squabbles I mentioned earlier.

Ian

You are absolutely right of course chas ! But you could say the same about any instrument that any arranger or keyboard is trying to emulate . A top professional could get sounds out of a simple triangle that a keyboard cannot ! Let alone an almost living breathing beast such as a Hammond organ .

An arranger can at best mimick most of the character of an instrument for a skilled musician to attempt to play well and in almost every category of sound it does it well . But perfectly ??? No not a chance .

Can an arranger fully replace any original instrument ? No not a chance ! But can it cover most of the bases to enable a skilled musician to fool most listeners that they are hearing the real thing ? Certainly it can !

I don't have the time to master the emulation of every instrument I love . But I can play guitar reasonably well and the keyboard/piano and the drums so I ha e an appreciation of what I should hear when playing or singing with a live band . The arranger does an "adequate" job for me when I don't have real players around me . It's not a substitute but it is sufficient for what I need it to do .

What I do is arrange . That's what an arranger does best .

I don't know if I've posted this clip of Cory Henry on the zone before but this is just for you Chas and anyone else that loves great gospel organ !

I remember a book that was sold during the Hammond B-3's peak years that gave drawbar settings that were to make the organ sound like strings, clarinets, brass, even bagpipe...I still remember they emphasized drawbar "shapes" that the ends of the bars made when pulled out like e.g. an inverted or concave "bow" shape.

Then, of course, there were the numbered registrations like "88 8000 000, Percussion On, Soft, Short, Third Harmonic" which was your basic Jimmy Smith tone.

Or a "reeds" setting could be 00 4632 10 and the shape resembled an inverted sawtooth wave.

I seem to remember the Piano/Vibes/Xylophone setting was "00 0000 000 Percussion On, Normal, Long, 2nd Harmonic" and, because the percussion only triggered when all notes were released, it took a little practice to get it to work right. If you needed more body and sustain, you added the 4th drawbar to taste.

This was often advertised as if to convey the "synthesizing" aspects of the B-3...it could be thought to be analogous to that of a fixed-envelope additive synthesizer.

Did it sound like the instruments? For the time, it was reasonably good, and, of course, like our arranger keyboards, it very much depended on the skill of the player to produce these imitations idiomatically.

Some bore a closer resemblance than others...I remember the bagpipe required the "reed" drawbar setting, "stopping" the Leslie Horns, and holding down a key for the drone and playing notes above it. Switching off the organ would give the pitch drop as the bagpipe's bag slowly deflated, but that detail wasn't encouraged by the manufacturer.

Around that time, the Mellotron was just coming out so it took over the role of making orchestral sounds for keyboardists.

Most Hammond players, including yours truly, just grabbed the bars and pulled them out (often a few or more at a time) until the organ produced the sound they needed, and moving them in and out while playing a lead line sounded pretty cool, sorta "sculpting" the tone.

I like Spalding's post above...it reflects a lot of my thoughts regarding the idea behind, and usage of, the arranger keyboard.

I mainly use my Tyros4 to create little orchestra or band replicas (or "scenes"), depending on the genre of music and what I'm trying to emulate.

I feel that the B-3 went from being an imitative instrument (pipe organ, synth etc.) to becoming an instrument that keyboard manufacturers did their best to imitate eventually producing the gaggle of clonewheels we see in recent years.

As good as some are, I still don't feel any one clonewheel manages to replicate ALL of the Hammond B-3's characteristics, but they do manage to bypass one attribute none of us really ever warmed up to...the B-3's weight and bulk when it came time to move it, especially after a long night of playing.

Ian

PS...Spalding, Cory Henry's playing is impressive, to say the least.

Very informative post, Ian, and very accurate. I hope those not that familiar with the Hammond organ take the time to read it. Of all the 'clonewheels', I think the KeyB Duo Mk111 comes closest to capturing the 'B3' feel. Not only the ergonomics (all the controls are essentially the same as on the original), but also the tone, keyfeel, console size, and the way the various tone modifiers (CV, keyclick, percussion,, chorus, etc.) work. I know that every owner thinks that THEIR selection is the best, but in this case, I've done A/B comparisons with the MOJO, the Nord C2D (which I also own) and most of the Hammond/Suzuki line, and with and without (internal 'sim') my Leslie 3300 and, although close, especially when played through the Leslie, I think the edge definitely goes to the KeyB. My choice of the KeyB over a 'real' B3 had nothing to do with economics but the amount of 'care and feeding' (maintenance) I was willing to give it. There were also some other 'convenience' features not available on the 'real' B3 that I liked (linked pedal, pedal sustain, transpose, and multiple models (A100, C3, etc.). I may yet get a 'real' one, depending on the available space in whatever house we downsize to (it would have to share space with a grand piano).

In the Lucky Peterson video, I was trying to show how it would be VERY difficult to capture the quality of BLUES playing seen there on an arranger keyboard; but then again, very few arranger players play the blues anyway, so maybe the point is moot .

chas

I agree with Ian that all you need is an arranger KB like the T4, S950 BK9, Korg Pa900, 3x, Audya, etc, to enjoy playing Organ if that's what you want to besides all the other great features, sounds & styles.....
There's more then enough within to get your juices flowing.
Plus you can take it wherever you go also. In reality let's face it how many "Hammondphiles" are there anymore that will go out and buy a Real B3 & Leslie vs all this new KB gear to replace it just as well? Hammond had it's time years ago and I for one was glad to be a part of it, owned one and played it on stage in the 60's, 70's also.

Donny beat me to the Tony Monaco thing. When the Hammond XK3 first came out along with the "New B3" Tony recorded a CD, Burning Grooves, using both his studio A100 and the New B3. Then he had a contest to see who could tell which instrument was on which track. Winner was going to get a new XK3. I was at the time buying, refurbing, and selling Hammonds with a master tech in Northern NJ. Point being I was listening and playing all kinds of Hammonds a lot. Got the CD, listened on and off to it thru headphones and sent my entry in. One night the Phone rings "Hey Bill, its Tony Monaco, you won ! " Wohoo
Spoke to him for awhile and he told me how he had been pushing Hammond for a long time to produce the XK3 and with the full XK3 system of lower manuel and pedals he would no longer be taking a real B3 for his travel gigs.
I think the clones sound and play great and except for the size factor of playing the real deal you don't miss much. Now Leslies are a whole nuther story. There is nothing that can recreate the air movement a Leslie creates. Once you mic it or get far away a sim is just as good there too. Demonstrated that to more than a few churches.
like Donny I'm happy I had my time doing tons of gigs with the B's but damn if the clones were available back then I would have jumped all over them.

Chas, maybe the reason we arranger players (and devotees) rarely play the blues is that we are just so damn HAPPY.

Even our traditional accordion loving Fran has a thing for arrangers.

I guess we are so happy because we have a very forgiving band on hand (left hand, at that!), that doesn't even complain about the occasional boo-boo or what genre of music we want to play, and how many times we'd like to play it ad nauseam.

Those little electronic band-mates are also very obedient, that is, if you give them the proper chords to play and don't make them play a 3/4 song in 4/4 time.

Seriously, instruments like the KeyB and Hammond XK3c Duo do give the gigging/home organist some worthy features such as different organ models/tonewheel sets and the transposer and many other adjustable parameters not possible on the ole B-3...I know a transposer would be handy occasionally when the singer is a little croaky, or we have another player, who wants already familiar tunes in another key.

Yes, I'm lazy, but I'm also 65 and I just want to jam and not take things so seriously (fun?)...jam sessions are huge stress relievers.

I always consider playing the Hammond B-3 an "occasion"...it's like driving a mint condition 1950 Caddy or Harley, as opposed to a new Lexus or Kawasaki.

Sure, I wouldn't want to attempt any long trips in a rather high-maintenance vintage vehicle any more than I'd want a genuine B-3 here in my apartment...I sold mine for a reason, mainly, as you say, the care and feeding can be bothersome (and pricey), but that doesn't mean I don't miss the old girl.

I suppose that's why some artists demand an actual B-3 on stage..."there's nuthin' like the real thing".

Ian

Bill great story wow!!

Ian funny lol...

Fran's going to kill you.



chas

lets be real shall we?..

Poor Fran...it must be hard to play with those vertically opposed thumbs.

That's probably from playing too much accordion....yeah, I know Fran, you can never have too much accordion.

Ian

If I might add MY 2 pennies worth ...
I have never played a Hammond, or any organ for that matter, so I cannot comment using first hand experience ...
But I will say this - I played for 1 year with a 'classic rock band' here in RI and we had a B3 player ... He had heavy duty piano legs (the top of the leg was about 4 x 4 )hinged on the sides to carry it (one guy under each leg) ... this was my first experience with a B3 and it blew me away ...
At the Newport Jazz Festival this year, there was more than one player using a NORD, including the KB player for Bobby McFerrin ... they sounded fantastic .... I could not tell if they were using a Leslie or not, and of course they are going through TOTL PA systems ... Joey D, however, played a B3 ...

My 'simple' answer to this 'debate, is that - putting aside portability, price, playing OMB gigs in NH, etc. - if you want the best REAL sound out of ANY instrument, you use THAT instrument and a player who knows how to accomplish that ... you do not use a sim or a clone ...
Arranger KBs have their place, but they will not REPLACE the REAL thing ...
JMHO

PS ... I was just looking back at this thread and realized I pretty much was paraphrasing what spalding said in an earlier post ...

A B-3? They arr Awful... Heavy...maintenance is horrific.

Leslie's add more mechanical parts to replace...wood to polish and glue back in shape...tubes, belts and capacitors to replace

I WOULDN'T HAVE IT ANY OTHER WAY!

Torn Rotator and all, I'll have a working, fire breathing real B-3 until I can't climb onto the bench.

If you haven't been there, you won't understand.

You don't play nursing home appropriate music on a B-3. And they don't pay nearly enough to incur the expense.

But, man, on the right stage, with the right audience and the right sidemen it's life affirming.


R.

Amen.

chas

Never got to play the B3 - just helped lift them out of the van - my back still hurts! OUCH!


Gary

There'as an old saying that comes to mind when comparing a clone or synth/workstatio/arranger organ sound to a Hammond B-3.

"You don't know the difference until you know the difference!"

One of the important aspects of Hammond playing (or any clone for that matter) is the proper use of the swell/expression/volume pedal as there is no other means to control the loudness, other than the drawbars, but they are too tedious and quite limited.

My FC-7 Volume pedal packed it in after many, many years of service, and man do I miss it!

It was actually more economical to replace the entire pedal, than it was to have the rather unique volume pot replaced...plus the rest of the unit was pretty worn and may have given other problems in the future.

I'll have new one here by next week.

I can't imagine playing any non-piano sound (especially organ) without the expression provided by a swell pedal.

Glad to see you are able to stay with the "real deal", Russ, and I hope the rotator cuff gets sorted out soon.

Ian

The problem with any style of music in an arranger is trying to replicate not only the authentic sounds but also the live interaction of the "band mates ". This is the real Achilles heel for arrangers or any auto accompaniment type instrument . The Blues is just one example of many .

But there are techniques that can be employed to provide the illusion of a live band playing with you . As technology advances it will get better .

The truth is chas that for me , my aspiration as a musician is bigger than my talent or the available time I have to develops the talent I have . I will never stop learning and practising but I don't have 8 hours a day to practice like cory or perhaps most of the blues players in your clip . So I have to accept some limitations not because I am lazy or don't know what excellence sounds like . I won't ever be a top piano/organ/guitar etc player but thankfully that limitation is not sufficient to block my creative processes with the help of an arranger.

Very wise words, and while we allready have some tools to spice up styles, like fills variations and such and pads with audio and arpeggias.... These are not quite enough to make it dynamic... For reasons you described, i prefer general styles, and not specific song styles, i allways try to create my own version of a song, and not replay it like the orriginal artist..

I am wayting for more AI features in styles. Which because its midi should not be that hard, they can have a parameter to comtroll the timing of a track, and another parameter to controll the note volume, the volume of individual notes.. The parameter would controll how many times this would happen at random and how much the deviation will be...

Even more interesting is round robbin, these instruments have several samples of each articulation and sometimes they just play a slightly differently played sound.. Would be great in the accompaniment

And then there is Karma tracks. Which could be made to react based on the players actions...

Anyway, those de delopers are way smarter then me and should figure out many more ideas which all together would recreate the feel of a live band around you.. Some controlled by the player, but most by the AI of the instrument...



Back to your statement, because despite all my interest in the technollogy, when i am behind my keys, i also realise i will never be a top player, and while i also try to become better as a player each day, i also find joy in playing with what an instrument has to offer me, .... But in general this is also what drives me towards new instruments with unexplored features... And then many months later i realise how much was still unexplored in the previous instrument...


But i am getting there... I play atleast 30 minutes piano each day, improving my skills... And in general play for 2 hours each day, which is a lot for someone having a full time job and a fammily to atend to....

Anyway... I write to much about me and not enough about the music..... Ians great response about the B3 now triggered me and i found a lot of documentation on how to recreate sounds and other instruments on a B3, and now i am wondering how that will work on my T5, tonight i will start spending some time with just the B3 simulation on the T5. Looking forward to it, using the instrument from a different pov will be so much fun...

Very good post, Worth (except for the last 6 words ). Obviously you are a big fan of Cory Henry. Me, I hate that little sucker....in his short time of this planet, he has managed to master an instrument (several actually) to the point where he could play me under the table with one hand tied behind his back and blindfolded . I'm kidding, of course. A talent like his is rare indeed and usually the result of that rare combination of natural talent and over-the-top dedication. A good support system, usually parents or a super mentor, also helps in a big way. Most of us fall outside of those lucky parameters and so must make do with what we have. I speak not out of animosity but just a POV, but I just don't see (the concept of) arranger keyboards as the answer to achieving one's highest possible musical goals. I still view it as somewhat of a crutch and a self-imposed limitation on one's creativity and playing potential. I was pleased to see that Bachus still devotes a portion of his playing/practice time to acoustic piano. By his own statement, that is what he views as the best way to improve his playing skills. I think that in the back of our minds, we all think that. Sadly, the second we start to have these types of discussions, the topic immediately turns to how much an instrument weighs or how portable it is or how many techno-features (read 'easy-play') it has......and how soon the next model is due out.

I've always had a 'geek' interest in arrangers and until I finally found an organ (clonewheel though it be ) that I felt was a suitable substitute for a vintage 'B', I played them quite a bit (well the Korg anyway, the T2 not so much). Even my C1 and C2D weren't quite as satisfying as I wanted but after purchasing the KeyB, I have hardly touched another keyboard since (except the C2D/Leslie 3300 that I use for gigging). I just seem to get the most fulfillment from playing the organ. It may just be my love for every variation of that great Hammond sound or my love for jazz/gospel/rock organ music, or just the feeling I get sitting behind that big console with full (25) pedalboard. It's like uncaging a beast. A few of you here know what I'm talking about. At least, I hope so.

chas

I think practicing piano is great if you are a piano player. I never played piano since a year or so of lessons when I was about seven.
Playing trumpet, guitar and drums when I was younger was much more "instrumental" in my development as a semi-accomplished arranger artist.
Since I was inadvertantly thrust into the role of vocalist (the real singer didn't show up and I wanted to get paid) the organ and then arrangers became my backing ensemble. I discovered early in my career that it was more lucrative to keep all the money than to split it four or five ways with an ever-changing cast of band members. As arrangers developed and became a viable force in music, even if most people didn't know it, arrangers were a perfect fit for me.
There are definite advantages to keeping an arranger for many years. I find there are more advantages to keeping up with the latest innovations offered by keeping a fairly current model. An informed buyer can purchase a new arranger, use it for a couple of years and sell it for close to the original purchase price. There are legions of fairly UN-informed buyers.
There are also advantages to depreciating gear for tax purposes that can make it cost-effective to upgrade periodically.
Plus I LOVE getting new stuff!

you will have seen this clip before Chas but please watch it again and this time analyse what you see and hear happening .

Marco is clearly using the arranger as a crutch but not in the sense that he can't play well but in the sense that he does not have extra hands and feet to Play all the parts himself simultaneously .

But is his creativity limited because of this or has his creativity actually been released by the auto arranger technology and the ability to smoothly transition between full use of the auto accompaniment and split keyboard live bass and searing lead.etc .

Where you might see limitation I see opportunity

I think you're confusing the performer with the instrument. It's like listening to Jascha Heifetz and giving all the credit to the violin. What it proves is that a great player can make ANY reasonable sounding keyboard sound amazing. Replaying these 'favorite demos' proves nothing other than we like the performer and the performance. Intellectually, I know that Claudia Hirschfield is a great organist but I'd rather "drink muddy water and sleep in a hollow log" than listen to her play. That says little about the instrument she's playing (except that I wouldn't buy one ). Listen to Marco on piano, organ, or synth. As with Cory Henry, you'll be equally amazed (maybe more).

All in good fun and in the interest of musical discussion. Everybody's opinion is valid (at least for them).

chas