Messages

New speakers in (the full range celestion ones I mentioned) I do really like them, the sound is a decent amount richer and I can turn up the volume without it sounding like crap, bass response also sounds more solid and less boomy. The distortion I was hearing was definitely from the old speakers. While it's not quite as detailed as with headphones, this is now allot closer and good enough for me. Not sure if it's a $1000 cad upgrade, but I'm happy I spent the money. If you like the bit of crunch the stock speakers have I wouldn't go with these as they sound super clean. Also something worth mentioning is the top octave is a bit quieter with the eq neutral but can be evened out with some treble boost, this is kinda the fault of me originally voicing it on a twin reverb which has a pretty big top boost so I could just put the pickups closer if I didn't like the sound across the whole keyboard with treble tuned up.
Also altho I thought it was wired front back instead of left right, it was LR, I switched it to front back and honestly it sounds the same but with a bit more depth to the tremolo now, added depth makes sense to me but I'm not sure why I was originally hearing it as front back. this will also allow my rear speaker/Chanel 2 mute preamp mod when I get the parts. 

So I am going to go with the new speakers, it's a risk I'm willing to take and I really want that full 20khz range for the overtones, will let you know how they sound when they're in. but after some thinking I'm guessing at least 50% of the problem (at least in my case) is comb filtering from the back speakers reflecting off the wall causing a slight delay relative to the front speakers (from the players perspective) that could create notches in relevant frequencies to the Rhodes tone. I'm going to make a crude custom preamp that disables the rear output after I get some 4 pin din connectors, and if this works how I intend I may look at modifying the original pre amp to be front speakers only when the tremolo is switched off, part of what led me down this line of thinking is that I hear less weirdness with the trem on full depth at a slow rate. If anything it'll be a fun little project since we got a pretty big snow storm where I live and I'm stuck inside.

Even with the twin in this position I'm still getting more bark and note separation/ clarity. really focusing on what I don't like about the suitcase amp, it seems to have a boost in the higher midrange that is fatiguing to listen to and drowns out the sparkle. It also seems to have more "ugly" distortion than the twin, maybe because I have the pickups so close and am giving it a stronger signal than it was intended for. The twin actually sounds good enough at normal volumes to just leave it tucked away there. I think I'm gonna go with some new speakers anyways but my main concern is weather I should just buy another twin or maybe a super reverb and run them from the suitcase preamp, or get speakers first and grab another amp later, kind of want to do both but that will have to wait.

Interesting, today I reluctantly carried my twin reverb up to the room I have the suitcase Rhodes in and positioned it as closely to my knees as possible, as well as pointed at the wall and behind me, mine has wheels so I was just rolling it around to different positions, no matter where I place the twin, it still sounds allot livelier and less dull than the suitcase even with the treble knob at neutral and bright switch off. This could be due to the open back cabinet dispersing the sound differently, not sure, the speakers in my twin should be just as old as the suitcase (both 1974) but I'm not sure what model either of them are, suitcase has a blue fender sticker, and twin has a brown/silver one. If it weren't for the stereo trem, and the fact I got the suitcase for cheaper than a stage usually goes for around me even with repairs included I'd be feeling pretty regretful right now, I still have some hope for new speakers tho.

That pretty much describes my exact experience... right now I need to do more research but i think I'm either going to go with Weber alnico blue dogs for character, or I was considering trying to find some full range speakers (maybe celestion f12 x200) as I think what I'm really after is being able to hear the overtones clearly and those would primarily fall outside of the typical guitar speaker range. My "suitcase" is the piano part of my old stage 73 fitted into the suitcase piano body/cabinet and with how I have it voiced (slammed pickups, almost a saw wave like quality when played hard) the best sound I've been able to get has been direct into the mic pre amps of a mackie vlz pro 1402, then into some dt1990 headphones. So while I think guitar speakers would have a more classic sound and be best for a typical Rhodes voicing, I really want that fuzziness that seems to happen when 10khz+ is allowed to shine. As for speaker placement relative to the player, it definitely has some effect, but at the same time my Wurlitzer 700 has the same sort of set up and I don't really have any complaints on the clarity of its sound so I think it should be possible to make something work. +1 for the full range speakers is that I still have and use a twin reverb for Rhodes sometimes so it would be more practical to have something that can more accurately reproduce the signal from the Rhodes than chasing character. I did sell my stage 88 a couple days ago so I think I will be getting some speakers soon even if the price tag on 4 of them hurts, will let you know how it goes.

Hi thanks for the response, do you remember which celestions you used?

I recently had the amp and pre amp redone in my suitcase 73, it's one of the Peterson pre amp with effects loop models from late 1974.
Problem I'm having is the sound out of the cabinet is a bit dull and lacking "crispness" (think fender reverb bright switch) the output to my headphones sounds great tho. Will there be any benefit to putting some new speakers in? Or is the high frequency definition hard capped by cabinet/ speaker placement relative to player?
Right now it sounds best when quiet but very dull when turned up to a normal volume. I do have it a few inches from a wall so that could be making it worse but I can't do anything about that with my space constraints.

In the video the grommets do look worn, it's not a guaranteed fix but that's probably the first place to start. Replacing grommets also helps make the "voicing" or tonebar screw adjustments more consistent.
I like to buy grommets with new screws from vintage vibe for a cleaner look, but you can get just the grommets from avion studios for a bit cheaper.
The tine could still need to be replaced tho for proper sustain.

Hi, have you replaced the tone bar grommets? sometimes they wear out unevenly and some notes don't sustain right while the rest are fine.

If it is one of the high range notes with the flat tone bar, you could try adding a tone bar clip, or a magnet to the end of the effected tonebar(s) and see if that helps.

If the effected notes sound weak or have a thud to the attack and are all in the same range of the keyboard you might need to do a slight strike line adjustment.

Take a look at the hammer tips, does the hammer for the problematic note seem in line with the rest?

If none of those help you probably just need to replace some tines.

I have a Hohner Electra piano that needs 2 reeds replaced, 1 is in the lower mid range and looks similar to a pianet t reed, but the other that's in the upper range is much more triangular shaped.
Does anyone have experience replacing Electra piano reeds or know of a source for originals? For now I will make my own out of some already treated spring steel, I'm sure it won't sound quite right, but I've made some before out of the same steel and they sustain pretty good. The ones that need replacing are circled in the attached photo and seem to have been homemade, they don't ring out at all and just make a quiet buzzy thud

After what feels like forever I've gotten the bump mod done and reassembled the piano, part of the time spent was deep cleaning the key caps, I had done the tops and fronts but forgot the side and inside of the caps as these are the hollow keys, another obstacle was using pvc-e glue, the end result is great and I've used it for all the new felt other than damper felts on this Rhodes with good results, but it takes some extra time holding it down against the bump to get it to stick and hold the shape of the bump properly.
Anyways, to answer my original questions, something on this piano is adding a bit of weight, and not in a sluggish way, the action feels great, better and faster than my wood key mark 2.
Im guessing there are a couple factors, I have new damper arms for vintage vibe and all new bridle straps, this probably improves consistency and key return speed, vv advertised these arms as improving action feel and even before the bump mod I gotta agree with them, maybe not the most price:improvement thing you could do, but they saved me the extra time of carefully removing bridle straps and felts from the dampers, and considering I was doing pretty much everything else and spending a decent chunk of change on a custom harp cover, I thought I'd do them and I'm happy I did. Next the wood hammers may have some small added weight, which is exaggerated by the leverage in the hammer/key relationship, it definitely dose feel like I have more weight to throw at the tines but that could mainly be the next point: the hammer throw is a bit less than without bumps, but a bit more than the factory wood bump action of my mark 2. Vintage vibe also seemed to make their newest bumps smaller, which I used this time, so that could add to the improved hammer throw vs mark 2 action.
Lastly, I've learned I'm not a fan of graduated hammer tips, my mark 2 has those, this piano has the "angled" tips from vintage vibe, that are angled like the graduated ones, but all the same height, I've been able to set my escapement really low without problems, and the action has surprisingly great dynamic range, I thought the mark 2 was good but this is much better.
I'm not sure why I didn't like the last one I did bumps on (plastic hammers) but that piano had graduated tips, was in overall worse condition, escapement locked in higher than I like due to aluminum harp supports that may have been mad a bit too tall, and I believe the bumps vv offers were designed mainly for the profile of the 1/2 wood hammers.
So if anyone is in the same boat I was, with an action that feels good already on a pre 75 Rhodes, just do the bump mod properly and I think you'll keep what you liked about it already while adding more to like about it.
I still have some more work to do, but so far this is going pretty good, already allot more fun to play than my other Rhodes

Ok thanks for the help, I'll try and get the let off tool as soon as possible, probably a keep dip block as well, altho I do have a 3d printer that's pretty precise and dose not get much use so I may see if I can just make something for key dip.
The key dip dose feel normal to me, but this is my only Wurlitzer, I've never played a different one, and I haven't touched an acoustic piano since primary school, so my only point of reference would be synths or Rhodes keybeds and that may be throwing off what feels normal to me.

Here is what it sounds like, before turning the let off screw clockwise a little bit with my diy dowel tool it was consistently worse, now it doesn't always happen, but I feel like I have to play harder than I should to get the hammer to hit on the keys I adjusted.
https://youtube.com/shorts/7YJ7rt0ATh8?si=edFp4e_Tk_AE4ETW

There is at least 1/4 inch between the reed and hammer tip when I press slowly, what it looks like is the hammer is hitting the reed then muting it on the way back down. After looking at it a bunch I don't think the reeds are loose,
I'm guessing the sound I hear is somewhat like touch harmonics on guitar, or whatever you call it when you pluck a string with your finger over a fret and pull the finger away at the same time.
I took a slow motion video on my phone, it's not slow enough to fully see, but it dose look like it's hitting the reed, then bouncing back up almost enough to hit it again, causing the harmonic thing. I will also try adding some paper punchings to the front rail pins just to see if that helps.
https://youtube.com/shorts/EPRrhiMRRGU?si=vR1QQvPno3CvdvWL

I'm sure someone else can chime in with more experience, but I've had 1 early 1977 stage and I wasn't the biggest fan, I'm pretty sure they all have felt on the back of the hammer cams which can be annoying to remove if you want to do a proper bump mod, and the side supports seemed to tall for my liking, which unlike the early wood ones can't exactly be cut down, you can remove the particle board shims, but that will only do so much, I've seen this issue mentioned before with this era but it's possible it's not on all of them, and if you like a larger escapement it should be fine, it only bothers me because I like to set it as close as possible.
As far as differences in tone I think it'll probably be closer to a late model due to the hammer tips being the same, on mine at least I found the sustain character to be in-between the early mk1 and mk2, and tonally closer to the later model, I think the voicing and setup do most of the heavy lifting but to me at least, in every example including the 2 I own, the early models have a more complex tone. The best way I can describe it is that the overtones on early models are more saw wave like/ sharper, and the late models have more of a low pass filtered sound on the overtones, the 1977 I had seemed to be more like the filtered sound of the later models, this is regardless of voicing.
If it's a good deal it's probably worth checking out, if you need the early sound I'd try and find an early one. The difference is not huge, but it is significant enough that it might lead you to disappointment if the sound you really want is that of an early mark 1.

Thanks for the suggestion,
I do actually use a service pretty often that receives packages in ny and brings them close to me for a $5 CAD fee, I might end up going that way, it's not super expensive, I just don't like spending more than the actual product cost on shipping but that may be the way I have to go.
As for going over the border it's too much time for the money saved, from where I live.

Ok I made an improvised tool out of hardwood dowel that only works for like 1 adjustment before becoming useless, but let off dose seem to be the problem.
I'll probably order the tool when vv gets it back in stock as I need some other stuff from them, shipping becomes too expensive for me when ordering from eBay since I'm in Canada. For now I guess Ill just keep cutting notches in dowels until I'm done, I have allot of them luckily.
Thanks.

Ok ignore the last part found a schematic and yes all 3 pins are used

I generally agree, I think I had a bit of a bias since I wanted to finish the restoration early, I've started bumps, will report back what I think about the weight vs my mark 2 after I'm done.
Note to anyone reading: clean or replace your back rail felt before levelling keys. I forgot to and had to redo the levelling due to large amounts of dust on the back rail felt raising the keys, replacing the back rail felt did improve hammer levelling once the keys were level. Regardless wasn't fun to level the same key bed twice.

Hi thanks for the advice, I took it apart and more work has been done than I thought, new damper felts which I knew already, but key bushings have been replaced, and key weights have been added on top of the keys.
The important part is the felt strip for the white keys has been replaced with green felt round punchings so that dosent seem to be the issue.
I'll try and get the tool soon and hopefully that's all that's needed. with the case open it sounds like metal on metal clanking, it's not the reed bar otherwise I would hear a loud sound when it's on, but I think the reeds might be a bit loose, kind of stumped.
On another note it looks like i accidentally broke one of the solder connections to the volume pot, mine has the power switch moved to the back so it's not anything like that, but I just wanted to confirm that the volume control is set up with all 3 pins of the potentiometer used? I don't think the tech who worked on it would have left a wire running up if it wasn't needed as he did a really good job on the amp asides from the added effects loop being to hot for anything without an input/output volume control but I don't want to break anything by re soldering it so thought I'd ask. Thanks.

Yes, they are just for the back of the harp cover to rest on. The damper rail dose not touch them, later they switched to square wood pieces in the corners of the case.
 

I'm not the original poster, but the center pin allows you to pre set the damper rail tension, I have also read it is necessary for proper function to keep the rail from flexing but that has not been the case in my experience and it doesn't really make sense to me since it is in pretty much the same spot as where the sustain pedal rod pushes and the rail is quite stiff. I currently have it not installed on my 1973 as I need to fill and re drill the screw hole for it, to keep it from pushing the damper arms near it off center.
Later pianos don't have it. Not sure about the exact cutoff date, it's on my 1973 and 1974, not on my 1977 or 1980. I'm guessing it was removed when the action rail and harp supports were switched to aluminum so maybe around mid 1975.

As for the original post, the side pins shouldn't spin and should be clamped down by the little metal bracket with 2 screws, make sure the screws are not cross threaded so you can tighten them properly, and I've seen the brackets bent a bit so they can make better contact with the pins. the missing pin will probably only reveal itself after removing the keys/action from the case, happened to me, looked everywhere, then it magically appeared once I took the action out. Is that angled cut on the left side of the damper rail factory? All the ones I've seen were straight, which causes the low tines to hit it when you have good escapement and strike line. I did a cutout similar to the late style damper rails on one of them, and will probably do the same to the other.

Hi, both my 1977 mk1 and 1980 mk2 measure about 60x120cm centre to centre, as shown in the photo you provided.

This is with the crossbars, which noticeably pull the width of the legs in a bit. If using without cross bars I'm guessing you'll need a bit more width.
I took measurements from the front, but I think it would still have some effect.

For body/case dimensions they are also the same at 57.5x114.5cm

88 key models also seem to have a similar leg footprint print, I measured same width, but a few more cm depth likely from the legs being pushed out by the extra weight.

My 1973 stage 73 dosent have the legs on right now so I can't do those dimensions but the body is a bit smaller at 56.5x113.9cm

Honestly I think they just used the same leg set and spacing on all of them.

For the actual footprint the rubber feet add a couple cm both ways.

I also only had a measuring tape to use so can't guarantee the best accuracy on leg footprint measurements but it should be within 1-2 cm

If you have an aluminum action mk1 on hand, that should be good enough to test the size of what you're making.

All measurements are from stage models.

2 somewhat related questions:

Dose anyone have a fender rhodes where the piano body uses 1 big piece of tolex to cover the piano body instead of the standard 3 piece style (1 for each side + 1 big rectangular piece to cover the front, bottom and back)
My piano has 1 big piece cut so that the only seams are at the corners, after removing it for replacement i noticed what looked to be some body filler used so i am assuming it's not original. It is wasteful but i prefer the look so i replicated it when replacing the tolex, I'm wondering if this was ever standard from the factory? It is less cost effective but I think it looks more elegant.

Another thing noticed while retolexing, the piano body appears to be made from a plywood bottom piece like expected, but the sides, front and back are made out of laminated pine board (a bunch of smaller pine planks glued together to make a wider plank). I know this isn't the case with the 1977 Rhodes I retolexed which was all plywood, does anyone know when the cutoff date could have been? It's not super nice wood or anything, but for home use it could make a good cabin themed Rhodes if sanded and stained. This is a 1973 stage 73 with the full skirted key caps.

While not particularly important, I do find these differences interesting and don't see any information on them.
Thanks.

Hi, I have a Wurlitzer 700 with the lowest few notes choking on a medium to hard strike, the note doesn't play except for a quiet harmonic. Weirdly the note works better if you press the middle of the key, this is only on white keys, the sharps in the affected section of keys work fine.
I'm wondering if anyone has experienced the same thing and knows what adjustment is needed.
I've had it for a few months, when I tested it at the guys house it all worked, then after a bumpy drive home I noticed the issue, just getting around to fixing it now as other than that issue it plays well already.
Thanks.

I'm working on a 1973 stage 73, when I first got it I remeber thinking how they could have sold a product with such a sloppy action, but after doing most of the stuff I had planed (basic vv refurb kit, bridle straps, new damper arms, minor setup including dropping harp support height) I've started to really like the action, it definitely has a bit more slop than my wood key mk2, but the added weight is nice especially when playing slower stuff, I've been going back and forth between Rhodes keyboards and I can't decide if I should be installing a bump mod, I've done one before on a 1977, but this Rhodes feels better To me without than that one did both before and after. I guess my main question is if the extra weight I feel is from the lack of a bump, or if the wood hammers add a bit of weight. I also have a 1974 88 I'm working on that feels sluggish and bad even with the harp height dropped so I don't think this is me liking sluggish keys, I normally play my mk2 and have loved the action. I'm not actually sure why the 1973 plays so good in comparison to the 1974, the pedestal felts on the 73 look worn with some black stuff on them where as the 1974 looks pretty much new. Maybe the new straps/ damper arms help? I know this is a bit of a convoluted question but I've been putting off doing the mod on the 1973 for about a week now because I don't know if I'll regret it.
If you have both plastic hammer and 1/2 wood hammer Rhodes both with pedestal bumps I'd like to hear your input on any differences in feel.
If you have an unbumped Rhodes I'd like to hear what you like about it/ what you did to get it playing well.
I might just go ahead with the mod and try to get my 1974 playing as well as this one without the bump mod, not sure, I have to decide in the next few days to stay on schedule. I have a silver sparkle lid from vv that's supposed to arrive Tuesday after 8 weeks of waiting, and my dads currently helping me re tolex the body, I'm trying to make the perfect Rhodes for me and ideally everything will be ready when the lid gets here so I can move it into the room with my other electric pianos for final voicing.
Is there only improvement to be had from a bump mod, or dose anyone prefer the feel without?