Messages

Love the look of the silvertop Rhodes.

The clip sounds like a Wurly indeed. The Wurly tone is like the Rhodes except it has less attack and no bell sound.

Very nice! And look at the tonebars, perfectly straight..!

This is my 1975 Rhodes 88 with wooden hammers:

http://www.audiorealism.se/tmp/rhodes88.mp3

It has a preamp onboard (I think its the optional one that Rhodes supplied) going directly into the computer via a DI. There are some anomalies in the sound (besides occasional missed notes), for example you can hear one of the tonebars smacking against the harp brace. I have fixed that since recording this.. Let me know what you think..!

--Mike

Rhodes will be the perfect gigging keyboard when antigravity is invented.

I'll be there 29th and 30th and it would be cool to meet other Rhodes enthusiasts..!

They are having a booth at Musikmesse?

It looks like normal 88 wiring to me.

In a shop last summer I played a beautiful '78 with bumps and it had bark and bite. The key dip was rather large, the keys would almost go down to cabinet. It was one of those actions that almost know what you want to do before you do. I regret not picking that piano up when I had the chance.

Insane collection!
I must get me one of these!
http://olivier-grall.yusynth.net/instruments/Pianos/HOHNER/hohner%20piano%20toy%20og.jpg

I would imagine that felts on the hammer would have better stopping power (felt against wood) and reducing double strikes but I have no way of verifying this as mine has the felt on the pedestals (felt against plastic).

Yes, I suppose it has a lot to do with playing style. But I also expect playing style fashions to have changed throughout the history of the Rhodes, and the requests for different set up factory Rhodes might have influenced the placement of the bump pedestal. Personally I don't find the action heavy on this '75 Rhodes (without bumps) but it does feel heavier than with bumps added. When I play it through an amp I find the action great without bumps, since I'm playing loud and dynamic. When I'm recording straight into the computer the volume is a lot lower and then bumps feel more comfortable for some reason.

I've also experimented in trying to measure the speed of the action, I did not detect any difference with or without bumps for a given velocity..

I have a Mk1 from 1975 and I voted 'No'. I experimented with bumps on a few keys and noticed a difference in the bite. Granted I did not set up the rest of the piano to compensate for the reduced hammer throw but the action is fine as it is without the bumps.

Sarcasm (01/24/07): My wife's comment as I moved the harp & pickup rail out of the way (i.e. into the living room) to get to the pile of music on the shelf behind them was along the lines of "I'm so glad you got another Rhodes so you could fix it". Isn't that why people buy one in the first place???

She refers to it as a 'Rhodes'? That's nice, mine usually gets called 'synth' or 'thing', even by musician friends (they are mostly guitarists though) .

Well the number of X's and O's act cumulative. Normally you would go up and down the piano with a tuner and press the Cents offset buttons according to the position of the X's and O's.

Hope this helps.

Thank you!

I've been thinking about whether lighter action by adding bumps is really that desirable. I personally like the heavier feel, and in a way I think it conserves tines (for me) because I know I can get a bark when I need one, I don't constantly have to pound on the rhodes to reassure myself.

Thanks for the tips guys!

The key felts looked clean though, there doesn't appear to be any mold. I'll try cleaning out the felts with compressed air, then some silicon or teflon spray and maybe put a mild wonderbaum in there for a while.

/Mike

I just got a Rhodes Mk1a 88 from 1974, very clean inside. Problem is it smells bad, kind of like dog pee. I don't think a dog actually peed in the Rhodes, its more like some of the front guide pin felts in the keys have some lubrication thats gone bad. The balance rail felts do not smell.

Any ideas about what I can do to remedy this? Other than that this Rhodes is smell free, unlike my newer 1977 which smells pretty good.
Some air freshener could do the trick but I do not want to spray anything that could interfere with the felts.

As it is now climbing under the piano near the keys like Keith Jarrett is a no-no..

Mike

Btw if your pins are breaking there is a good chance your hammers are worn. New hammers have very satisfying snap to them.

Twisting  the hammer sideways while rotating should do the trick, but I've also managed to break a pin here and there.

Thanks Dan, that makes sense..!

Which hammertip configuration is the standard?
The Rhodes service manual states:

Hammer Tip Number Durometer Reading
(Hardness) Height
1 through 30 30 1/4" (6.350mm)
31 through 40 50 5/16" (7.938mm)
41 through 50 70 3/8" (9.925mm)
51 through 64 90 7/16" (11.112mm)
65 through 88 Wrapped (extra hard) 7/16" (11.112mm)

while Steve's technotes state:

00 - 23 = 30 shore
24 - 33 = 50 shore
34 - 43 = 70 shore
44 - 57 = 90 shore
58 - 81 = Maple with 3 layers of shrink tubing

If I recall correctly Majorkey has another recommended configuration.
What is your hammertip configuration? I've followed the Rhodes service manual except for a few tips here and there giving my Rhodes a quite mellow and smooth tone. I certainly see the need of having a second Rhodes set up differently .

--Mike

In the 1999 TV movie portaying the 60's band Sweetwater a blacktop _Rhodes_ can be seen, though it sounds either like a Rhodes, a wurly or a clavinet depending on which song they are performing..

There is a "MP3 demos coming soon" note on the Speakeasy Rhodes Restorations Reviewed (09/14/06)´ page. Would be interesting to hear..

It works rather well actually, the touch is more defined, kind of like an acoustic. However a side effect is that the action is more noisy, something that could be fixed with felts.
--Mike

Sorry, just noticed I posted this in the wrong forum. Maybe the administrator could move it?
--Mike

Hi Guys,

Just wanted to advertise a backcheck mod I discovered which I think you will find interesting. Check:

http://ep-forum.com/smf/index.php?topic=2362

Any thoughts?

--Mike

We're all familiar with the bouncing keys of the Rhodes, and here's a quick solution if you happen to have an extra set of hammers+combs (I have a full set left over because I exchanged my old worn hammers with ones I got from Vintage Vibe).

Simply take comb+hammers, flip upside down and fit against the nameboard rail (actually resting on it) so that the hammers (now called backchecks) are synchronized. The backcheck combs may need to be shimmed or fitted with felt so that the hammer is caught properly. On my piano (a 1977 Rhodes Mk1 73) there is a near perfect fit, I needed only to shim the backcheck comes with some paper. The backcheck combs can be secured to the nameboard rail by drilling holes where the comb mounting screws go.

Here's a photo of the whole set of backchecks installed:



It works like this: When a key is depressed the backcheck will rock with key and release the upgoing hammer so that it can fly up and hit the tine. When the key is released the backcheck will catch the hammer coming down and reduce key bounce. See the pictures and videos below.

Hammer at rest:



Key depressed:



Here are two videos demonstrating the keys with bounce vs keys with backchecks, and the action:

http://www.audiorealism.se/tmp/backcheck_keys.mpg ~4mb
http://www.audiorealism.se/tmp/backcheck_action.mpg ~4mb

This works surprisingly well, I've been playing with this for a few hours now and the key bounce is almost completely removed. The rest of the action feels as normal if not tighter. It does not feel any heavier.

The cons of this mod is that the rhodes lid must be cut since it will now be resting on the backcheck combs instead of the name rail. I have not yet commited to this as I'm still experimenting with it, but if your interested on how backchecks might feel and you have some left over hammers it may well be worth a try.

So what do you think?

--Mike

platypus,

The cost issues aside, does it sound good though?

Mike