Messages

Ok, this is a bit of market research. I'm thinking of putting together some workshops in August in the UK to go over the fundamentals of rhodes setup with a small group of players/prospective techs. People could bring their rhodes and we could spend a whole day going over all the fundamental aspects of adjusting the mechanics of the rhodes: voicing, strike line, escapement, sustain, dampers, etc. And maybe even look into other aspects of the instrument such as preparation, 'inside' piano playing, and working with computers.

If anyone's interested feel free to email me huw60@hotmail.com. I've been working on rhodes for years and have recently started my own business in mainland europe as a full time electric piano tech.

Having learned the trade working in the UK I'm well aware that I would have saved months of time if I'd had someone show me at first hand how to work on the rhodes. I'm a firm believer that any rhodes can sound amazing. No one should ever accept that their piano will never sound as good as what they hear on records.

I'm based in Utrecht, so if anyone over here needs any help with their rhodes let me know. I have a stage 73 dyno with me over here, and a wurlitzer 200a which I'm about to repair the amp on. I'm thinking about getting my other rhodes and parts sent over as well. Email me huw60@hotmail.com if you have any questions. My Dutch isn't so great yet but I'm going to take some classes!

I have a silvertop in the UK, the suitcase top only. It is missing the namerail, but plays excellent. Please email me off list if you're interested. Huw60@hotmail.com.

Sounds like key weights. The seller is wrong in stating that the balance pin on the key of a piano is also the centre of balance of the key. All he is doing is just making the rhodes action heavier.

I have a 54 in the UK I'm looking to sell. It has the legs and pedal. Contact me off list if you're interested.

Night Child.

I have never seen a late mark 1 or a mark II that needed any extra escapement, and I have never heard of this being recommended by anyone serious tech. The vast majority need lowering if anything. A longer hammer throw is only of relevance where the key ped is in contact with the hammer, not the where the hammer is in free travel between key and the tine.

I invite anyone to demonstrate how this could possibly work except as a mask for poorly set dampers.

Since when does dropping the escapement make a piano sound have more overtone and raising it give an earlier 70s sound? Raising the escapement is never desirable on a rhodes unless the low notes are double striking or the hammers in the higher range are blocking. The most sensitive action and the most striking power come from escapement set as low as possible without any of the above problems. Escapement set high results not only in a heavy unresponsive action but also in a loss of striking power. As soon as the hammer loses contact with the key pedestal the laws of gravity dictate that it will decelerate.

The only time more overtone may be obtained on a piano with the escapement reset is if the strikeline has not also been reset as is always necessary with a global escapement adjustment.

You find them on ebay from time to time. Music parts guru probably has some. I have some but I'm in the UK.

Don't increase the tension unless you actually have slack damping that a clearance adjustment won't fix. More tension = a less sensitive action. The action becomes hard to play soft and has an unpleasant springy feel. Also tension adjustments are very hard to do without messing up your sustain pedal response.

Change your key ped felt and back rail felt if you want to reduce bounce. If you're really serious about it fit backchecks.

There are some decent guys out there: generally they are players as well. Try Matt O'Regan if you don't want to tackle it yourself. But if you have a bit of time it can be done: especially the piano bass as that only has 32 notes to work with!

Change the back rail felt and pedestal felts. Lower the escapement. Shim under the front of the rubber standoffs to compensate for them perishing over time. Make sure your strike line is set properly. This will give a big difference to the top end.

The plastic key rhodes can be made to play very well: a good one can be better than many of the rhodes owned by plastic key detractors. There are issues with the guide pins breaking, but generally the difference between them and other rhodes is overstated.

The clavinet.com pads work well on the pianet T, but I agree that they are unusable on the pianet N due to the clicking. I would have though that you could get some advice from the Dow Corning company as mentioned in the patent. I checked their website and it looks like they would have something suitable.

If you read the instructions on adjusting escapement correctly you will have noticed the strike line always needs to be reset. This is absolutely vital for the correct tone especially on a hard strike.

The addition of pedestal bumps should not mean a need for increased escapement as at its highest point the hammer rests on the back of the key pedestal, not at the front where the bumps are. With the correct methods these bumps should not be necessary.

Increasing escapement only reduces dynamic range as once the hammer leaves the key pedestal the laws of gravity dictate that it will decelerate.

The issue these early mark 1 pianos have is damper tension. This the main cause of the heavy unsensitive feel of the action of some of these pianos. They sometimes have room to have some of the tension taken out (read the manual), or you can mod them mark V style for more rigidity/less tension. This will give you a more sensitive action with enough stopping power. With enough work you should be able to get it to play as well and sound better than your mark 2.

I have a large collection of rhodes which I maintain myself, and I service the occasional piano if I'm asked. I've had rhodes on hire to Birmingham jazz in the last year, though I don't do much at the moment as I'm concentrating on playing and writing.

New grommets = better more consistent sustain, particularly in the high register. The new grommets also mount the tone assembly better. New wood core hammer tips are essential for evenness of tone production. Every tech should change these. The old ones never sound even. The rest of the hammer tips  you can get away with shaving if they're not too worn or flipping to an unworn side. I like to reuse the old ones as the reissues I've used are a slightly different hardness.

If you like the sound of it then I wouldn't worry too much. But any inconsistency in tone is not normal in a serviced piano if all the correct procedures have been carried out. You should be able to solo right at the top of the instrument with plenty of sustain and and even tone and there should be plenty of bark in the midrange without having to resort to too much eq.

All the rhodes I've seen that have been to hammond hire had very little work done   and played poorly. They voice too far off the pickup with too much fundamental.

I believe Tiny often gives the excuse that the some rhodes are better that others to make up for the fact that he can't be arsed to take on any of the more involved procedures associated with actually doing the job properly. I notice that new grommets and hammer tips are not on your list. And what does downstops packed' mean? If 2 octaves of tines being blocked by the hammers then there is a global escapement problem: the harp should be raised with shims on the right side harp support.

Your dampers are corroded. This weakens the bits of metal that holds the bridle strap. The mark V I used to own had this problem. The only solution short of new dampers was glue: obviously not desirable.

The mark V is over-hyped. The action has scope for more sensitivity than other rhodes but the sound is nothing special. I always preferred the sound on my 1975 stage 88. The hammer tips need returning to the configuration on earlier models to get less harshness. The rubber standoffs make the high register less playable.

Those 2 Moulin albums are all wurlitzer and synth. No rhodes at all.

I don't agree that the early models should be for collectors only. I have a 112 and a 700 (both with different actions). I think they will be perfectly useable when I've done a bit of work on them. I find the 140/200 actions a bit springy as there are 2 springs in the action as opposed to 1 on the earlier models (I removed all the hammer butt springs on th 112).

That is correct. You can set key dip with felt strips under the back of the keys. You will find that the distance under the namerail is reduced by removing one of the felt strips. The manual has the right measurement for key dip.

The playing is great but the rhodes tone is dire. There is not enough fundamental in the upper midrange and sound is very clanky. I would look for a warmer tone with more bark and less clank.

I wanted to mod my suitcase pre with the same circuitry as the 'e' rhodes. I did have contact with the owner of one of the Leeds rental rhodes (I think it was the 'b' rhodes) a while back and he gave me a few details. It's still on my email somewhere.

My experience of comparing suitcase and stage for quiet playing is that though the suitcase sounded great, with various preamps and tremolo units I could the stage to do anything I wanted. I would use either a stewart or dyno pre and use the stereo outputs of a dyno tri-stereo tremolo to valve amps on opposite sides of the room.

I always say the same thing because it's true. Too many people fall for the suitcase mythology. As you say even the ultimate suitcase rhodes recordings bypass the amp.

If you're not into the looks then just look for a properly set up stage. There are plenty of preamps on offer that will shape the sound any way you want.

I will concede that from a playing perspective the earlier suitcase rhodes do sound great played solo. But add the rest of the rhythm section and you're fighting a losing battle. The later models are far too muddy without modifications.

I have a old peterson suitcase pre that I will get up and running when I have the time. Maybe I can eventually be proved wrong.

Unless you're after the look I wouldn't bother with the suitcase. It is just the same as a stage except with an oversized and underpowered amp, and a flimsier case bottom.  Modern amps/pedals will give you everything you need soundwise.

The suitcase amp at 20+ years old will almost certainly be in need of an overhaul. The last one i saw was in a studio. It did look great but the engineer said the amp was too noisy to record.

Reshape them so there are no grooves making sure the strike point is consistent. They will be hard after you finish them so voice them by drilling into them with a needle until the tone is even. You have just about enough felt to work with. New hammers are expensive and time consuming to fit and will become grooved very quickly.

For escapement take a bit off the top of the harp supports.

Matt O'Regan. He does house calls and is a professional player. His details are in the parts section of the supersite.

the lowest note is c 2 octaves below middle c. I love my 54. I use it for loads of gigs including jazz piano trio where I'm doing most of the soloing. The lack of range is a good thing as it forces you to work within the limits of the keyboard.

That pickup diagram relates only to early 1960s silvertop rhodes where the pickups were wired in groups of 12. The mod would raise the output significantly. From 1969 or so all 73 note rhodes were wired like this from the factory anyway.

It sounds like you need to do a fair bit of rewiring. I think the lowest notes on the rhodes 73 are grouped in 4 and then in 3s after that. Make sure you get the break in the pickups the right way round or the bottom group will make no sound.

Check the top end. Very small adjustments make a massive difference.

It looks like someone has changed some pickups at some stage and not done a great job. It is possible to resolder. I've had to put 50 new pickups in a rhodes before now.

By the way, your rhodes is not modified. All rhodes after 1970 or so had their pickups wired like that from the factory. Yours is just the victim of an incompentent tech.

If you can get it to birimgham I can fix it for you, but anyone with the most basic knowledge of electronics should be able to do it.

Don't remove the harp brackets. They are there to make the harp more rigid. Without them your tine/pickup settings will move significantly. If you don't believe me take the brackets out and watch how the tine rail and pickup rail move as you undo the screws.

To get rid of the vibration just bend the bracket out of the way.

You obviously didn't noitice my post in that thread.

Nice, but too many effects. Record the basic waveforms on their own if you want to really demonstrate how the ek-10 sounds.

Compared to the polysynths around at its time of release it is nowhere. The volume of the synth adjusts well to the rhodes sound, but the timbre stays the same giving a very flat feel to the sound and making it hard to play expressively.

I totally agree that the mark 3 synth sounds are terrible. In fact I don't think your samples demonstrate the full horror of the ek-10. You need to leave the sounds exposed with no rhodes to truly hear how bad they are.

There may however be some redeeming features to the ek-10. I've posted this question on the other lists having just acquired an ek-10. Having read the repair manual and patents it looks as though the ek-10 would be easily expandable to send midi signals or at least give some form of control over better synth voices than the ones inside it. Does anyone think this is possible?

There are only 2 positions on the plastic key pianos. To adjust remove all the keys and the harp, unscrew the balance rail. Relocate it to the other slot on the base of the case, and screw it back down. Replace the keys.

Ignore the above advice. That is a huge amount of work. On the mark II the key pedestal bump is integral to the key pedestal and will you will need to chisel it off each key! The result will not make the action that much heavier.

If you want a heavier action I would suggest key weights. These can be purchased from vintage vibe or from any piano parts suppliers.

If your rhodes has the plastic keys you can move the balance rail to get a heavier action.

Once again, the later pianos are more than capable of getting as much bark as you want. The earlier pianos can be made to sound as smooth as you want. There is a subtle difference in tone but we should put aside the mythology that they are different instruments.

The tonebars have a bend in them which I believe is to allow the tine room for vibration on a hard strike. Try re-centering the tine on the tonebar.

Chances are the key peds are a different height on your new set of keys. This would mess with the escapement by pushing the hammers up further. There is a fair chance that the key peds would be misaligned as well.

I can never see the logic of swapping keys between rhodes as the wooden ones were always cut differently, particularly in the models from 1975 and earlier.

I wouldn't touch the felt on the hammers unless it is excessively worn. The felt on hammer cam action has a great feel with a couple of mods. Just reduce escapement as much as you can with out double striking/blocking hammers.

Without these mods the action does feel very heavy however.

Surely wd40 on the tuning springs is a bad idea as it would act as a lubricant making the tuning less stable?

Yes, it's a 1983 date stamp on the pickup rail, of course it has the dreaded plastic keys, but the same tines as the mark V.

Go for the 71. I'm working on one at the moment (with a pickup rail from 69). The sound is awesome, and has a warmth that the late 70s rhodes don't have.

If you can't live with the extra difficulties of working with the early 70s action then the late 70s rhodes can be made to bark. Bark should not be a problem on any rhodes if you know what you're doing with the setup. It's the extra warmth that distinguishes the early 70s models though.

As for the felt tips I think 1970 was the year of the switch, though rhodes from 1970 seem to be extremely rare. Felt does produce a different sound. You can get even more bark than neoprene (with the tips voiced correctly). Swapping an early 70s harp onto a set of late 60s teardrop hammers gives more bark than I've ever had from a rhodes.

Tnelson is right. The front guide pin felts are only there to protect the keys from an excessively hard strike. Key dip is altered by changing the thickess of the felt at the back of the keybed under the key pedestals or adding or subtracting shims under the action rail. The manual has plenty on this.

If your keys are touching the front felts when pressed down then your rhodes is set up wrong. To try and reduce key dip from the front guide pin felts would mess up your escapement and reduce striking power as the hammer cam would not be rotated the full distance in contact with the key.

Apologies for the slightly heated debate. I hope we can swap more information soon. I will probably need some help with my 200a fairly shortly.

Steve O: being a piano tech doesn't qualify you to take the high ground on working on rhodes. Your other recent post on this forum on damper kiss is also misleading. I would suggest that you get one of your rhodes out of the box and see how far it can be moved around with the screws loosened.

The chances of someone building a replica case for the piano are not great. Look for 2 small holes where the front screws may have been. They may well have been removed.

It the keys are sticking on the front edge of the case the piano needs to be relocated: that is nothing to do with key bushings. A slight move is enough. I have done it many times (usually it was me who put the piano back wrongly first!). Look carefully for the 2 front screws. The previous owner may not have put them back in, but they are much smaller.

There are certain differences but the setup is the most important thing. Don't be surprised that your new rhodes sounds muddy and uneven. Whenever I go to buy or service rhodes I barely bother playing them before I revoice them. It usually takes quite a few hours work before I would be prepared to gig with a new rhodes.

I don't know what the previous 2 posts were about. This is a simple problem. We all know the rhodes action is a compromise, but it can be very good if properly set up. Damper kiss problems are solved by having the correct clearance and tension in all registers of the piano. The factory clearance was usually more than adequate so if you are getting damper kiss there is something wrong. Read the manual if you are not sure.

It's nothing to worry about. Just take the rhodes out of the case and reposition it. There is a fair bit of room to move it around in there. Be careful as the 4 screws holding the piano in place can sometimes be stiff.

I would also take the namerail off and see if there is any debris under the keys making your hammers sit uneven (the hammers will never be pefectly aligned).