rhodes mk 7, mk1, mkII and nord stage comparison

[fjzingo@hotmail.]

Hi all,

YouTube - comparison RHodes mark 7 , mark II, mark I and Nord stage

Did a recording/video for myself to compare the sounds my Rhodes Mark 7, Fender Rhodes mark I and mark II and my nord stage.

It's a little bit shortened due to the limits of youtube(guess 10 minutes of rhodes is more than enough)

Like all comparison, it will never be all fair. The rhodes pianos have different settings the mark 7 in the typical chic corea voicing, mark2 and mark 1 more in the ideal setting. The nord stage mark 1 suitcase.

Everything di into my soundcard, the mark II via a summit audio 2Ba-221.

Please enjoy, judge for yourself what Rhodes sound you like, they are all very different.


/Fredrik

[Infa]

Wow, that was very nice man ! You got some chops homie.

Man, I was wanting to get one of these new Rhodes, but now that I hear that, I say the second one you jumped to (I think the Mark I ?) was the best sounding one. It just sounded more buttery and ever so slightly soft in a good way. The new Rhodes was a bit harsher sounding in my opinion, too sharp and precise for what I would use a Rhodes key sound for. But it is really nice, and with maintenance considered I may still get one. After hearing that I would say it is the closest you will come to getting that cool old school rhode key sound on a new piece of gear.

In my opinion they ranked like this (and JUST IMO):

1st place = Mark I (just a real nice buttery sound that was soft but still nice and perfectly bright with out getting harsh on the higher keys !! WONDERFUL !!)

2nd Place = Mark II (nice sounding, just slightly less buttery than the Mark I, has alot of the same qualities though - IMO)

3rd Place = Mark 7 (very nice sounding, but did sound slightly harsher/"crunchy bright" towards the higher keys than the 2 older models. The tone had a more "deliberate" sound to it that I did not like as much. Hard to explain.)

4th Place = Nord Stage (just horribly sterol or something, oddly dark but yet too harsh at the same time, but not really, like a hard to explain problem with the tone I just did not like personally)

Either way, great job, nice playing, and wonderful comparison !!

THANKS !!

[fjzingo@hotmail.]

You can eq the mark 7 to get a more old school voicing....less bell.

/fredrik

[fjzingo@hotmail.]

Just messing around with some eq on the mk7 , not my favourite eq the built into motu 828 mk III

YouTube - eq

/fredrik

[Infa]

Originally Posted by fjzingo@hotmail.

Just messing around with some eq on the mk7 , not my favourite eq the built into motu 828 mk III

YouTube - eq

/fredrik

Yes I do hear it in that last video you posted. Sounds a little more like the Mark II now. But I feel it still does have a touch more of a "deliberate" sound to it. Like, clean and scientific. Whereas the Mark I's and II's have a more haphazardly awesome accidental sound to them. With a touch more "magic pixie dust" to 'em too.

But still, especially after that last eq'ing video you did, I am running out to get a Mark 7 asap !! It does sound great. Basically as great as you can get now-a-days with a more hassle free piece of gear.

Man, Fredrik, I really appreciate this work you are doing for us. These comparisons are awesome !

[Sounds Great]

Thank you so much for posting this! You are the Rhodes man.

Was the second piano the MK 1? That is by far my favorite. Really has the Rhodes sound I remember, the midrange, the organic mojo. The Nord is surprisingly good, but too much bite. The MK 7 is pretty good, but doesn't have the mid growl I'm wanting to hear.

[PlugHead]

I am very thankful for you posting this: hats off - some nice licks in there.

I concur with the others: the Mark I has the best sound of the lot, and the Mark II close - I know they can be voiced to sound similar, but in this scenario the Mark I wins for my aesthetic.

I've continually been impressed with the Nord Stage - my gigging colleague uses one and we have used it here in the studio for tracking - I'm very impressed with it's emulations - from truly believable piano sounds, to the rhodes and wurli (even the clav!) sounding very, very close to the real thing.

I imagine the Mark 7 must play very nicely, tho I would really want to voice it more like the Mark I - something about the 'plastic' sound as it moves across the break into the upper register that just grates on me.

I need to get my Mark I back up to great playing/sounding condition: still looking to do the repairs myself, but sadly, I'll be waiting a very long time - a growing family means no time to rebuild that lovely axe...

cheers,

[Infa]

Originally Posted by Sounds Great

Was the second piano the MK 1? That is by far my favorite. Really has the Rhodes sound I remember, the midrange, the organic mojo. The Nord is surprisingly good, but too much bite. The MK 7 is pretty good, but doesn't have the mid growl I'm wanting to hear.

Yea, according to the text "description" on the YouTube page, the second piano (one on left of screen) is the Mark I.

Quote:
"Mark 7 towards the window, Mark I to the left, Nordstage up front, Mark II to the right."

So the Mark 7 was the first one he played. Then the Mark I was the second piano he went to. Then the Nord was the third piano he went to. Then the Mark II was the fourth piano he went to. Then he went back to the Mark 7 at the very end.

I agree, the Mark I just has that warm soft natural mid range and organic mojo that just can't be exactly matched.

[RKrizman]

Originally Posted by PlugHead

I am very thankful for you posting this: hats off - some nice licks in there.

I concur with the others: the Mark I has the best sound of the lot, and the Mark II close - I know they can be voiced to sound similar, but in this scenario the Mark I wins for my aesthetic.

I imagine the Mark 7 must play very nicely, tho I would really want to voice it more like the Mark I - something about the 'plastic' sound as it moves across the break into the upper register that just grates on me.

It seemed like, in terms of the playing fluidity, the 7 had the best action. The Mark I sounded worlds better, like a Rhodes should sound, but it seemed cumbersome to play.

Definitely don't like the plastic/bell sound of the 7's upper range.

-R

[fjzingo@hotmail.]

Originally Posted by PlugHead

I am very thankful for you posting this: hats off - some nice licks in there.

I concur with the others: the Mark I has the best sound of the lot, and the Mark II close - I know they can be voiced to sound similar, but in this scenario the Mark I wins for my aesthetic.

I've continually been impressed with the Nord Stage - my gigging colleague uses one and we have used it here in the studio for tracking - I'm very impressed with it's emulations - from truly believable piano sounds, to the rhodes and wurli (even the clav!) sounding very, very close to the real thing.

I imagine the Mark 7 must play very nicely, tho I would really want to voice it more like the Mark I - something about the 'plastic' sound as it moves across the break into the upper register that just grates on me.

I need to get my Mark I back up to great playing/sounding condition: still looking to do the repairs myself, but sadly, I'll be waiting a very long time - a growing family means no time to rebuild that lovely axe...

cheers,

Get you're mark 1 back on track, three kids haven't stopped me.....

[fjzingo@hotmail.]

Originally Posted by RKrizman

It seemed like, in terms of the playing fluidity, the 7 had the best action. The Mark I sounded worlds better, like a Rhodes should sound, but it seemed cumbersome to play.

Definitely don't like the plastic/bell sound of the 7's upper range.

-R

the mark 1 has the magic upgrade so it's not bad at all, feels like a synth keyboard. Unfortunately not dynamic at all, which the mark 7 really is. Will raise the harp a bit on the mark 1 to get a decent throw.

Actually I really like the action of the nord stage-control. The Mark 7 action is very good indeed, but I'm not as used to it yet, it takes some time to get used to new actions.

It's strange to change keys as I do in this video, the throw is different for all keyboards....

/Fred

[fjzingo@hotmail.]

Originally Posted by Sounds Great

Thank you so much for posting this! You are the Rhodes man.

Was the second piano the MK 1? That is by far my favorite. Really has the Rhodes sound I remember, the midrange, the organic mojo. The Nord is surprisingly good, but too much bite. The MK 7 is pretty good, but doesn't have the mid growl I'm wanting to hear.

Actually the mid growl (warmth)disappears with this kind of voicing(chic corea, and all yamaha rhodes emulations sound like this) , I've revoiced my mark 7 to shallow/ideal setting but I actually set it back because I missed the bite. Freddan Adlers(rhodes supersite, rhodes clavia blablabla) who is the official rhodes tech here in sweden and I will sitdown later this week to experiment with the sound a bit and especially in the are the hammertips change.

/Fred

[Sounds Great]

Originally Posted by fjzingo@hotmail.

Actually the mid growl (warmth)disappears with this kind of voicing(chic corea, and all yamaha rhodes emulations sound like this) , I've revoiced my mark 7 to shallow/ideal setting but I actually set it back because I missed the bite. Freddan Adlers(rhodes supersite, rhodes clavia blablabla) who is the official rhodes tech here in sweden and I will sitdown later this week to experiment with the sound a bit and especially in the are the hammertips change.

/Fred

Yes, don't get me wrong, the 7 sounds very good, looks great, and is new! It just lacks a little something, if you could figure out how to dial that in, it would be perfect. Is this the active or passive electronics, and also I wonder how much different a suitcase model would sound? I grew up with an 88 key suitcase Rhodes in the house.

[matucha]

Isn't the markI action part of the sound? I like it the most. But I wouln't leave markII on the street when someone throws it away .

Nord... flat and unorganic at first, but then I've got used to it (in the video) and it wasn't so bad. But the tone is a bit "synth-like" at some moments. Great thing for gigs, in studio - well - it's not the real thing.

Mark7? Interesting, but too clean for me.

[fabricaudio]

Nice!!!

Lucky you, you have all of them. I just have a MARK II 73 suitcase and nord electro 2 73.

MARK 7 may be a good investment for a studio if it is more reliable than the old ones in terms of tuning and mechanical parts


One thing for sure, i will not carry any of them in a gig any more since i can replace them with the nord


Nikolas

[fjzingo@hotmail.]

When I first got my mark 1 the action was terrible, good for building strong arms-a body building machine. Now I have the magic upgrade-it's miles better.

trust me the ark 7 can bark!!

fred

Originally Posted by matucha

Isn't the markI action part of the sound? I like it the most. But I wouln't leave markII on the street when someone throws it away .

Nord... flat and unorganic at first, but then I've got used to it (in the video) and it wasn't so bad. But the tone is a bit "synth-like" at some moments. Great thing for gigs, in studio - well - it's not the real thing.

Mark7? Interesting, but too clean for me.

[fjzingo@hotmail.]

That's not bad at all, you can get most rhodes sounds with these two boards.

I must say it might be worth carrying the real stuff to some gigs.

/Fred

Originally Posted by fabricaudio

Nice!!!

Lucky you, you have all of them. I just have a MARK II 73 suitcase and nord electro 2 73.

MARK 7 may be a good investment for a studio if it is more reliable than the old ones in terms of tuning and mechanical parts


One thing for sure, i will not carry any of them in a gig any more since i can replace them with the nord


Nikolas

[Jim Williams]

I designed the Mk 7 preamps to emulate the old sounds while allowing new ones as well. The EQ is powerful and can sculp the sonics in several ways. The secret is the mid control. If you bloom 300 hz a bit an turn down the tops just a bit it's very much like a mk-1.

The front end preamp is a unique discrete jfet in front of an opamp. That design is heavy with 2nd harmonics to allow a rich sound. It is not the super clean stuff I'm usually associated with. It also allows a variable amount of drive to emulate the discrete 2n3391 transistor preamps of the mk-1. It will bark like a dog if you set it up right.

To get there, crank up the volume/gain pot on the mk 7. At about 3 o'clock the dirt begins to happen. You will need to attenute the outputs a bit to prevent the next stage from overloading, a shure pad would work fine for that. Then you bloom the lower mids, cut some tops and let that old magic happen. I found it sounds best into the 4x12 cabs as those have seperate input volume controls that allow you to overdrive the piano and turn down the signal into the powered bottom.

For a truer mk 1 sound, those mk 7 Eminence speakers do 10k hz, too high. Use Eminence V128's for that old 70's sound without speaker breakup. That will low pass filter the top end into that old mk 1 sound.

Mk 7's also have an effects loop or "accessory". Use outboard pre's, gadgets and processors for more sonic options. That takes the signal right off the harp.

The hammer tips are the same as mk 2. The harder rubber grommets and tighter hammers do allow a clearer top end than the wood hammer mk 1's. That also allows for the Stevie Wonder "hard hammer" sound if you crank up 8 k hz in the mids and goose the tops a bit. That allows for that sound without the hammer tip replacements I did for most of Stevies's Rhodes. When I showed Stevie the change from a mk 1 sound to his trademark hard hammer sound with a couple of knob twists, he was estatic.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

[fjzingo@hotmail.]

Hi Jim

Thanks for the tips, unfortunately I didn't get the active version of the mark 7 but I guess I could use the settings you suggests with other eqs. Perhaps I'll upgrade after this.

/Fredrik

Originally Posted by Jim Williams

I designed the Mk 7 preamps to emulate the old sounds while allowing new ones as well. The EQ is powerful and can sculp the sonics in several ways. The secret is the mid control. If you bloom 300 hz a bit an turn down the tops just a bit it's very much like a mk-1.

The front end preamp is a unique discrete jfet in front of an opamp. That design is heavy with 2nd harmonics to allow a rich sound. It is not the super clean stuff I'm usually associated with. It also allows a variable amount of drive to emulate the discrete 2n3391 transistor preamps of the mk-1. It will bark like a dog if you set it up right.

To get there, crank up the volume/gain pot on the mk 7. At about 3 o'clock the dirt begins to happen. You will need to attenute the outputs a bit to prevent the next stage from overloading, a shure pad would work fine for that. Then you bloom the lower mids, cut some tops and let that old magic happen. I found it sounds best into the 4x12 cabs as those have seperate input volume controls that allow you to overdrive the piano and turn down the signal into the powered bottom.

For a truer mk 1 sound, those mk 7 Eminence speakers do 10k hz, too high. Use Eminence V128's for that old 70's sound without speaker breakup. That will low pass filter the top end into that old mk 1 sound.

Mk 7's also have an effects loop or "accessory". Use outboard pre's, gadgets and processors for more sonic options. That takes the signal right off the harp.

The hammer tips are the same as mk 2. The harder rubber grommets and tighter hammers do allow a clearer top end than the wood hammer mk 1's. That also allows for the Stevie Wonder "hard hammer" sound if you crank up 8 k hz in the mids and goose the tops a bit. That allows for that sound without the hammer tip replacements I did for most of Stevies's Rhodes. When I showed Stevie the change from a mk 1 sound to his trademark hard hammer sound with a couple of knob twists, he was estatic.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

[angelvoice]

Listen to the Namm- Show 2007- Recordings of the Mark7, it is for sure another world, compared with ANY MIDI- Keyboard, also the Nord- stuff.
It sounds very natural, it must be fun to play and it is fun to hear.

Why the difference? In my opinion, it's not only about the sound, it is also the really bad timing of the serial MIDI- interface. Playing a digital thing you will never hear the notes of a chord in the same time, even when you played it very accurate as a unit. Not one Digital Piano in the World can offer you the same analog precise behavior than any "real" machine, including the Mark7, a wurlitzer, a Steinway, an old Hammond B3 etc....

Even if almost nobody is talking about this in the net, in your subconciousness you will (hoprfully) remark it by comparing both worlds.
WHY the industry does not introduce a better, not serial but parallel technology? My answer is: As long nobody cares about this grievance, nothing will change.
Play the newest "fantastic"- Piano- simulations, especially the Roland "Super- Piano". It is just horrible! I keep my CP-300, it is much better!
This lead me to give up my waiting and hoping for the perfect Piano/ Rhodes- whatever- simulation. I waited for 20 years, but it is not enough time in one life to wait another 20. I need something like a real Rhodes to take with me on stage, and I'm excited, that there are new ones on the market!

If you finally play a Mark7 live on a gig, for sure there will be not a Mark I or II on the same stage to directly compare!
Another thought about the lovely warm Sound of a Mark I:
Quite often I listened to bands with a keyboarder, that brought a very heavy Fender Rhodes Mark I or II with him, but I could not hear the Rhodes. In some cases I heard a little bit of something of his second keyboard (Strings, Synth...) but not the Rhodes. Keyboards unfortunately are often mixed too low, so if your rhodes is a Mark7 and you can get it to bite through the bandsound, isn't this preferable?

For me, one thing to clarify is: Is it possible to adjust the mechanics, tines, pick-ups etc. of a Mark7 in a way, that it sounds more like a MarkI? This would be perhaps a better compromise then "reparing" the sound with the EQ?
Sorry that you removed your youtube- movie about EQing, Fredrik...
I would relly like to hear it.
Regards, Holger.

[The MPCist]

I've got an old Fender MKI & MKII. Both gone thru extensively and cleaned/refurbed/brought back up to specs. Actually I tried the new ones and just.... don't feel it. I mean, it's good but the old ones still have the TONE exactly where I want it whereas the MK7 is just too 'moderny' for me...

Maybe the MK7 needs time to sit and oxidate its tines to get that smooth tone... dunno. Maybe it needs to be broken in like a car or piano..... dunno.