Messages

Hi,

I've been having some troubles amplifying my rhodes recently. I was using a 100 watt solid state amp, but it was too harsh and distorted too quickly - even though it was loud.

So I went out and bought a completely refurbished mid 1970's Fender Quad Reverb - it's a 100 watt tube amp which is basically the same as a twin reverb, only instead of 2 12" speakers it has 4.

Unfortunately, this solved nothing! Again, by the time the amp is loud enough to compete with drums, bass, guitar, and vocals, it's distorting like crazy! This isn't pleasant because I do a lot of high- note solos, quick percussive trill type stuff, and when it's distorting like that, you can't even tell what I'm playing because it's too muddled.

So what does one do in this situation? IAm I supposed to mic the Quad reverb, with the quad set before it starts to distort?

I just don't understand how cats would have played a rhodes in a club back in the `70s? Do I need 4 15" speakers, 4 -12" speakers, horns, and a 400 watt amp dedicated to the rhodes, just to amplify it so it wont distort? Everyone has told me that the twin reverb is the THEE amp for the rhodes, and I went and bought a twin reverb times 2! And in opnion, it just doesn't cut it at all unless you like muddy distortion....

It's a shame too because the rhodes I'm using is an early 1973 with curved keys, and it sound great....and the amp was just completely re-tubed, recapped, and sounds super quiet and clean. Any thoughts on the matter?

Thanks!

Very simple reason why pianos up until early `75 have better bite/bark/sound in general.

1. Wood / plastic hammers
2. Warmer sounding tines

The tines thing is a biggie

They have a disclaimer on their main page that they run Major Key as a part-time operation only.  It may take a few days or even a week before they will get your order processed.

So. It shouldn't be the customer's problem that they are "part time". Get in or get out of business.

my only words:  leard how to play piano.  it was designed like that 300 years ago and it's worked for centuries.  my god tell him to get a job.

Or learn to play both. That would be impressive.

Sound samples please!  :lol:

you keep on playing in your nice covers bands where your rhodes comes in so useful - you'll go far.

This I have to take you up on. Please share your original mp3's with us. You know, original music, as opposed to covers! And when you are trying to argue in any capacity, it will kind of make you look stupid if you can't use grammar to your advantage.

Dont let this fool wind you up  

I agree, he is trying to wind us! As I said earlier, I'm sure this guy would love to have a Rhodes. He states that the Rhodes sucks, but when was the last time you went to an instrument forum regarding an instrument you felt sucks? Really, would you waste your time?

Oh I've played plenty of Rhodes pianos.  They suck.

Get  out of here. No one wants you here.

This Rhodes Mark 1 was made in November/December 1976 (4776-5064). This was my first Rhodes ever, and my uncle had to make a custom crate to ship it in (from CA to CT. With the proper crate, UPS can do no harm really). I'll never forget the day I got off of the school bus (maybe back in 2002?) and literally ran to my house. When I first saw it I couldn't believe how large it was. It seemed really friggin big. And I couldn't believe how poorly the action felt. Horrible, just  a nightmare.  

I was told that the seller had some work done on the piano in 1977, including an exciting custom brown-vinyl job on the outside. The pickups were split so that the first 24 notes were given a dedicated output (a ¼" output is drilled directly over the "R" in Rhodes). The adjustable legs we swapped with non-adjusting legs for "added stability". Many of the mid-range hammer tips were replaced with harder tips (to add a stronger attack).

Unfortunately, none of these modifications translated into a better sounding and playing piano, and when it arrived in 2002, the instrument was suffering from years of serious, major neglect. My first impression of the Rhodes was a very bad one. The action was unbelievably sluggish, the individual pickup volume was completely uneven, multiple pickups were dead, and above all, the sound was not like the Rhodes I cherished. The sound was boring, flat, limp, flaccid. It was quite nasty.

In 2004 I got the courage to do my first "overhaul" and make my Rhodes come to life. If it weren't for the help provided by Steven Hayes and John Della Vecchia (just to name a few), this Rhodes would still be crude and unplayable. I began by soaking every single tine in kerosene and carefully cleaning each one. I replaced all grommets, all hammer tips, re-wired the pickup scheme to a single output, replaced all of the dead pickups, replaced broken tines, and made sure the tone bars were all clean. To help the action, I added the key lift option, which helped individual key articulation and allowed me to do trills. Re-adjusted the damper arms, (arms were bent, but felt was in good shape). I lubed all points of contact. I replaced the balance rail felt and guide pin felt (which by the way, makes the action feel new again. Really makes it nice and soft). I re-adjusted the strike line because it was all out of whack. I re-adjusted the escapement to factory spec, as it had been lowered. The timbre was set to capture the more harmonic sound of the Rhodes tines. I placed the tines as close to the pickups as possible. I did this to help with the lacking sensitivity, and low volume (I know a lot of guys don't like them too close but I like it). Upon removing the wooden keys, I noticed that the first one had the date of "10/20/77" written in pencil – the date when the first "modifications" were performed.

One other thing I did, which by the way happened after these sound samples were done, was remove the keybed felt, thus giving the keys a longer keydip and hammer tips further distance from the tines (there is still some keybed felt/glue remenance so the wooden key isn't actually touching alluminum). The action really isn't sluggish now, and if I had to choose, this was probably the most critical "mod" I performed because now the tines really get whaked hard and they bark loud as a result (sadly I don't have a recording to demonstrate). Well here it is, ugly and brown!





Here are the respective sound samples. Tell me how you think it sounds! It's not perfect. I'll bet a REAL tech would find a number of problems. I don't get to play too many other Rhodes..at all..so I have nothing to judge it against. PS- not very good recordings at all. Quite low and noisy- for the stereo tremelo it's a dunlop TS-2.

http://octavecat.homestead.com/JazzChords1976.mp3

http://octavecat.homestead.com/FastStereoTrem1976.mp3

http://octavecat.homestead.com/MinorchordsReverb1976.mp3

The following sound sample is me going friggin crazy. Actually, what I mean is I was so desparate to get the pre-1975 wood/plastic hammer sound- you know, the "Fender Rhodes" sound, as opposed to the Rhodes. I wen't crazy trying best to get that sound, so what I did was cut small pieces of maple (about 1.3 inches long and however wide the hammer is) and put them directly on the plastic hammer, for about 24 notes. This did make it sound more like a pre-'75. Actually one tech guessed it was a 76' pickup/tine rail on a '74 action, so mission acomplished to a degree. It was impracticle though, but I would like to do something similar again, to get more upper-midrange bite. Warning- sound sample is bad, only this time worse  :oops:

http://octavecat.homestead.com/FenderrhodesSample.mp3  


EXTRA- Here's a photo of another Rhodes I now have, which is an updated 1978 with dyno my piano mods (the 78's with the modified peds). Can't say I've ever seen one before. It sounds good- it's very different than the '76 though. One thing that really bugs me is understanding the keydip. The key dip travel is longer than the '76's was (before I removed the keybed felt) yet the keybed felt is 100% intact on the '78. I have no idea how other to increase keydip without removing keybed felt. To this day I still don't get it. Shim the action rails? It doesn't make any sense. I've looked over both of the pianos in and out, and I can't see any difference, though what I can't see might be my problem.    




Well in any case I hope you had a good read and a good laugh. I've enjoyed reading all of the other submissions. I especially like seeing the "Fender Rhodes" !!

Best Regards

careofcell69, your drawing rocks tits!

it can do all the nice soft stuff and can also really growl. i don't think i'll ever bother buying a rhodes.

If you don't think you're going to like owning a Rhodes than don't buy one. If someone is so vapid to not see the beauty in all of these vintage miracles I really have to wonder. I think deep down you want a Rhodes to compliment your 200A. You probably haven't played a mechanically sound 1974 or early 1975 Fender Rhodes. I know if you did you would bother buying a Fender Rhodes!  

...And there is such a huge difference in sound between the "Rhodes" and "Fender Rhodes" (particularly where upper midrange frequencies go). But how does anything past '77 sound 80's? The insides of a some 78's are identical to the updated '75s and '76s. The updated '78s (i.e markII's) have a markII sound, but more often than not, the people who complain about harshness in late 70's models don't know how to properly set the piano up. I took a pinching '78 once and simply added more fundemental to the pickup/tine relationship. I had the '78 because I was working on it for a friend, specifically I was just changing all of the hammer tips because they were rock hard. When he came to pick it up he was enthralled to say the least. The thing that pleased him most was the ability to slam the higher notes without worring about harmonic shrill.

Sorry about the rant. To answer your initial question I wouldn't choose one over the other. That's stupid. That's like asking me if I'd rather have a mellotron or a string solina. I don't know. They both sound very good.

good picture

hey there
The only time I sand tines is when I find rust. I usually soak very fine sandpaper in kerosene before sanding.

PS I would not advise taking the tuning springs off

Wow!! Nice playing. Really nice, I dig that jazz-rock style of soloing and playing jazzy type fills. For some reason, I remember watching the video at my friends house a while back (it worked on his PC not mine) and it was a different video! Am I just crazy?

Anyway, nice work and playing. Was your rhodes set up by someone? Did you work on it? Or did just buy it as is? I like the 1978s/79's. I like the key dip and that "crack" at the tines. By the way I think you'd like to hear one of my rhodes in action. This is me on a 1975 wood/plastic hammer rhodes and in it you can hear some of those blues/jazz type licks you were playing. Not many but you can sense that jazz sort of thing.
http://octavecat.homestead.com/Sunshine.mp3

But thanks for putting up that file for me! I saved the clip for future references. Thanks again

Its my friend Barney Williams playing he is an amazing talented player. Maybe you saw some other clip of him as there are a couple floating around... heres another http://www.backroomsounds.com/video/barney.ram

My Rhodes has been restored and setup by me learning as I went mainly using this board and site for reference..  
And yes its an early 1978 model but now with a bump mod on the action side of things.

Nice sound clip sounding nice dude..

I will try and get these pictures sized and hosted this week  

.

Let me ask you-
Is the early 1978 piano identical to say a 1976? Is this felt on hammers, and bare wood pedestals? Thanks, that would really help!

Best,
John

I will post up a series of pics for the restoration job if anyones interested.

I would be! I love seeing photographs of people's working progress. I should get in the habbit of posting up some before/after sound samples too.

Here you go cherry5 i hosted it for you to download, its just a bit of fun really

http://www.backroomsounds.com/video/tail_feather.avi

On the picture front I still need to take the rhodes outside and get some proper finished shots but I should get on and do the rest and post um up so you can see what a Rhodes Nerd I turned into doing mine up.

My girlfriend used to point and laugh when I came in the house with parts of a piano showing them more love than her.  :lol:  :lol:

Just jealous !!  :lol:  :shock:

Wow!! Nice playing. Really nice, I dig that jazz-rock style of soloing and playing jazzy type fills. For some reason, I remember watching the video at my friends house a while back (it worked on his PC not mine) and it was a different video! Am I just crazy?

Anyway, nice work and playing. Was your rhodes set up by someone? Did you work on it? Or did just buy it as is? I like the 1978s/79's. I like the key dip and that "crack" at the tines. By the way I think you'd like to hear one of my rhodes in action. This is me on a 1975 wood/plastic hammer rhodes and in it you can hear some of those blues/jazz type licks you were playing. Not many but you can sense that jazz sort of thing.
http://octavecat.homestead.com/Sunshine.mp3

But thanks for putting up that file for me! I saved the clip for future references. Thanks again

Having an issue with your Right channel?

wow, that really sounds good. I love love love vintage tape machines. I have a 1977 80-8 (half inch 8-track) which sounds PERFECT for Rhodes! Digital just can't handle to tone of the Rhodes, it needs tape!

Is this a mark II?  

Thanks, love hearing clips.

Damn to bad this video doesnt work for me. Id love to see it.

To bad the audio files dont work

I find re-attaching the bridal straps to be somewhat easy. Just pull down on the damper and let it hook! Just watch your hands so you dont force hammer tips off!

So the early 70's bite then really comes from the harp, but was there any neoprene tip change from early to late 70s?  I thought I read somewhere that there was but obviously there's a swarm of heresay and rumors, and i'd assume that'd have some effect if so.

Thanks
Ben

In my opinion, the wood/plastic "fender Rhodes" hammers play a much bigger role in producing that "bite" you refer to than people say. I have a '76 here that has about 5 1974 tines and 10 1974 pickups in it. Yes when you tap the 76' pickups it sounds differently than the 1974 pickups do. The Orangy-later pickups make more of a "round" sounding clank, and the Red "Fender Rhodes" pickups produce a more narrow kind clank, not as open or brittle sounding. And sure, the older tines seem to have less high frequencies (though not much, you really can't tell the 1974 tines from the 1976's). However, when I have swapped a later (75-79) harp into a wood/plastic hammer action, I know that "bite" obviously has most to do with the hammers. I've developed one mod allowing you to get that bite from plastic hammers, but again, the light action kind of has to take a back seat and a lot of adjusting has to be done. In my opinion you can buy any rhodes and make play how you want it to; you can make every single note bark as hard as you want it. You can obsess and in about a year, I guarentee your Rhodes will be a better piano because of it. But if you want a killer rhodes *now* then you should take it to a tech and be very specific with what you want it to do.

Heheh..
Hrees. has some interesting thoughts...

Heh- 40 views and only one answer! Thanks fred (lol).

I'll post the correct answer when people start chiming in! No need to make a case, just type in four digits!

Best!

The Challenge:

Guess what year this Rhodes is from. The playing is illogical and somewhat lame, but see if you can guess what year this piano was made in. No amp, no effect, just straight off of the harp into a soundcard.    

http://octavecat.homestead.com/FenderrhodesSample.mp3

Thanks

Good luck!

EDIT- The tine/ tone bar rail and pickup rail are of the same vintage!

LIGHT touches of Hatfield & North and Egg, interesting. Would like to hear more progressive developments!

I think I'd be happiest with a 1976. For a different reason, Fender Rhodes from 1974-1975 would also be best. Having wood in the hammers makes for a totally different sound. The sound changed right when the name changed.

I am experience an issue that has occured ever since I removed the harp to do some internal cleaning and vacuuming.  When I push a key down and release it, it kind of "bounces" back.  It's not enough to make it double strike but it's enough that you can hear the bounce in a recording.  It seems to be more obvious in the lower half of the board.  Any ideas?

There is a song from a band called Heatwave, titled "mindblowing decisions". The introdction is just a Rhodes with three separate notes that can be heard bouncing back as you describe. I guess they didn't mind in 1977.
I think that backchecks are quite a good idea and would probably eliminate most keyboard issues if done correctly.

I wouldnt pay 320 for a Fender rhodes that probably needs some work (ive never seen a rhodes in a shop for sale that DIDNT need some help!).
My price point is the 1976 stage I bought for $250, which did come with legs and braces and pedal. And that was only a year or so ago. I would try to get this guy down down down to 200 maybe. But that is just me.

Explain your 1975 Rhodes? Is it plastic hammer? Is it Rhodes or "fender' Rhodes?
I've played a lot of 75's and I like `em.

this forum is ridiculous.

not two months ago, i asked almost the exact same question ('is there any way to get a rhodes repaired without it costing an arm and a leg') and everyone who replied told me to fix it myself.  after thinking about what my rhodes needed, fixing it myself seemed like a reasonably cheap and relatively painless thing to do.

By all means fix

So whatever happened? You ever get any of those rhodes? Dont ya hate post and runs?

my rhodes is in perfect condition except for needing the action tuned up a little bit.  even so, the best estimate they gave me was $400-$1000.

What year is it anyway? If your saying all you need is an action adjustment, then you can do it yourself. But I would really have to play it to see how perfect of condition it is. Actually do you have any sound samples? Im just curious anyway.    

good luck finding someone who's going to sell you a rhodes for $250, unless it's missing half of its keys.

Well...you'd be surprised. Thats how much I paid for a complete 1976, and I also paid a little more for a 1977 (which wasnt exactly complete). You have to know the "art of the deal". These people weren't asking 250-315, they were talked down to $250-315. They usually dont know s**t. They often feel embarrased when i say "jeez, this thing needs a lot of work to brought up to factory spec"      

keep in mind that some of us aren't made out of money and we can't just toss $1000 bucks to some tech to do something that, if we put forth a little effort, we could do ourselves for about 1/10th of the price.

i've never heard a rhodes patch sound like a rhodes.  ever.  even the nord electro doesn't have it right.  maybe they got it sounding good on a computer, but i'm not bringing a computer with me to play gigs; i've tried that before, for drum machine parts and sequencing, and computers just aren't reliable.

I think all rhodes patches sound like garbage, but Ill take volume and dynamic eveness and playability over a trashed rhodes that needs hours of adjusting. Also, I wish I were rich! Ive actually never taken any rhodes to a tech. I do all my own work, but after working on a few pianos, I can truly value a techs small price to pay. Rhodes aren't easy in my opinion. Strike like is always fucked up, tines never line up with hammer tips- there are just too many variables involved. Id say 400-1000 isn't much money at all. You could probably save a couple hundred in a period of 4 months no?

best

i'm in the same boat as you: i need my rhodes to be serviced and the thought of taking it apart myself gives me nightmares.  BUT, the cost of repair by a licensed rhodes repair place is almost always more than people have paid for the rhodes itself.  

i emailed speakeasy (in pennsylvania) about repairs, and their estimate was '$400-$1000.'  f that.  i paid $650 for my rhodes, i'm not about to pay almost double that for repairs.

Hmm.. I think that the value is really in how well your Rhodes is. I personally think the tech work is more valuable than the Rhodes itself usually. There have been many instances where cheapo Rhodes patches would've done a better job at behaving like a Rhodes than a REAL Rhodes itself! The mistake was paying 650 for a Rhodes in need of service. $250 seems to be the price for the average "used and abused" rhodes.

I, myself do not agree, but that's another topic.
All the best,
Freddan

I know what you mean, but the fact is they both do different things. It seems like the pre -1975 rhodes is more suited for funk, rock, jazz, etc. Though, it doesn't lend itself well to haunted bell sounds that the plastic hammer models seem to do.

good questions...

The serial number was right under the top cover-- I'll check for the other one soon.

I don't know about a sound sample, but I'll check on that as well.

I'm actually a bass player--upright and electric-- but can  play a little piano.  I think I've wanted a Rhodes ever since I first heard one, you know.  You Octave cat looks really cool too-- is it like the bass Rhodes?

It's good to hear that my Rhodes is not too difficult to work on--I do all of my bass steups myself so I
m hoping that some of that knowledge will transfer.  Thanks again John.

Brian D

My favorite bass is a 1976 Fender jazz, no contest.

The four digits in the upper right hand corner are the start date, and the four digits in the lower right hand corner are the finish date.


The octave Cat is an analog synthesizer, capable of playing two notes at the same time. This is far from an electro mechanical rhodes- you should check my Octave site out

www.octavecat.homestead.com
John James

BTW, I got it for $350.  Pretty good deal, eh?

Finally, can we post pics here?  

Thanks again,
BD

You need to host your images elsewhere, right click on them, and go to properties. There is an address. Copy that address, and paste it between these two tags  

I will try it with my 1976 octave cat




350 is GREAT for a suitcase. I paid 250 for a 1976 stage complete, but needed work. You should check your grommets, tips, felts, etc.

Eight views and no comments?  Sheesh...  was it something I said?   :wink:

?

These forums aren't exactly "lively". Its so dead around here I hardly come.

Hello,
I just picked up a Rhodes Suitcase 88 for a great price.  The date code is 3162--so does that make it a 1976 model?  

Tell me where this 4 digit number is located. Is is located on the tone bar rail, or the pickup rail? Im assuming its on your tonebar rail, meaning week 31, year 197-6, day 2 of the week. There should be a four digital number, upper right hand side, pickup rail.

It is in great shape-- at least aesthetically-- very minor rips in the tolex and the grill cloth is almost perfect.  Also, all cords are original and the amp works and sounds wonderful.  Any info would be great.  It sounds great, but there are a few keys that need some work/adjustments.  The last octave is pretty much unusable right now-- it sounds kind of "farty,"  you know.  I have downloaded the service manual and will eventually dig into it.  As a bass player, I appreciate your help and wisdom.
Thanks,
BrianD

Hmm, maybe you should post a sound sample? My first Rhodes was a 1976, and they turn out to be quite easy to work on. They have plastic hammers and bare pedestals. The bare pedestals can have some plastic placed on them to raise the key lift. The action is easily picked up, Id like to see about adding backchecks and light weights to see what can be acomplished. Here is a sound sample of a late 76` Stage.
http://octavecat.homestead.com/JazzChords1976.mp3

We want sound samples! I want to hear your Rhodes! just slap a mic up, we don't care!

john

That is an incredibly ignorant point of view!

I do agree the pre 1975 pianos have a bit more soul than the mkIIs. But it is to do with the slightly warmer tines. For me the ultimate tines are on those 1960s rhodes: they have less bark as they are less flexible, but the tone is dark. If anyone has any let me know!

I put 4 1974 tines into my 1976 stage and can't really notice the same greatness of difference though, I do hear a little. Something else about those pre-75's. You can just tell when you hear one. Here's an example

http://octavecat.homestead.com/Sunshine.mp3

Yeah, the Rhodes was so mass produced that prices shouldn't be jumping out of hand (and I think it shows when comparing prices to 200a, clav, etc).

With that said, the many variables the are instilled in the Rhodes mean that many instruments won't even be up to factory spec. I know this from playing many Rhodes pianos around the bay area; usually they are of little value to me as a performer. I had to deal with this first hand when I picked up my Rhodes. I've had to put a good deal of money into it a lot of work to bring it back to life. Unlike a strictly electronic based machine, (ie synthesizer- either performs or doesn't) the Rhodes can't be measured in functionality. Each Rhodes has a different feel and needs certain treatments.

It should also be known that the techs hold the power in reality. One guy is trying to sell a 1972 stage that is absolutely mint. He wants around $1200 for it which I think is incredibly fair (considering minimoogs are at $2400). You know this piano is going to have absolutely no issues what so ever.

JJV
www.octavecat.homestead.com

Heh...well I paid 250 for a rhodes in much better shape than the mk1 he's describing (including extras). Its just that the machine itself was in bad shape. It was quicker for the seller just to give it a rest and sell it cheap as he knew there were issues, and also that parting it out would have taken too long and wouldnt be as quick of a sale. So yes, Id value a poor condition rhodes with no legs, sus pedal or anything redeeming value at around 100. I personally wouldn't pay more than 100, though you are right, parting it out could yield greater results. But it doesn't seem that this teacher is too up-to-date on vintage prices (I doubt the teacher paid out of pocket for all of these rhodes). The Rhodes II is easier to set up, but the first Rhodes action isn't much more complicated to feel out, and I really adore the "mojo" that the older pianos have

Hi-

It seems that no one replied to your questions. This "forum" is more like a ghost town.

If you claim that the knobs are touching the aluminum, then you are looking at an old Mark I - pre 1972. That is the one I would go for. I say forget about the mark II, the student one may be more "collector" and valuable- but so would an old mark 1 (compared to a post 1975 rhodes).

Here is what I would do: Offer the teacher 100 dollars for the stage piano Mark 1. Come to her with an attitude of superiority- tell HER how it is, and how you're doing her a favor by lifting off some paper weights. If she has a problem with this, then run down the list of failures-

hammer tips- 100
legs- 100
sus pedal - 100
gromments 50
Extra tines, pickups, and other costs 100

That may or may not be the price of any of these things, but your teacher doesnt know that, and lets face it- she aint gonna lose any sleep over a dying mark I.

If the mark 1 is in as bad of shape as you say it is, offer her 100 and no more. It may part out for more, but as a self contained machine, it will need a lot of work. You may not seem to be up to the challenge, but working on a rhodes is Ad lib, and you will work hard if you want a great sounding rhodes. Mark II is just too midiocre to really "suggest" as a first rhodes. Sorry.
Im really tired so I hope this comes across logically!

John
www.octavecat.homestead.com

ahh wouldnt that be www.speakeasyvintagemusic.com ?

Pretty long site name LOL

Never once have you mentioned opening your rhodes and adjusting it. Tine angle to pickup can be adjusted, escapement can be adjusted, grommets can be replaced, etc. Maybe your hammer tips are too hard and worn. You should really look inside before you think about buying another. but trust me i just played a 1972 that sounded like crap

John
www.octavecat.homestead.com

Hah- crazy that no one replied to this.
I have a 1976 Stage that NOW has "that sound". Its warm, funky and barky, also bright and bell-like like the older Rhodes sound.

To me its all in the escapement distance. 2 years ago this rhodes sounded worse than a digital rhodes patch (isnt that terrible?)

I have played a few 78s and 79s, and they are very stingy sounding. I like that. Ive also played a mark II recently which sounded wonderful, full of tone. Not harsh or bright like you describe. Discrete circuitry may have something to do with it, but a FET circuit isnt going to change the sound of your piano in reality. I would work on your rhodes (escapement, tone/tine adjustments) and if still nothing gives, Id sell it and look for something older. And yes, you were crazy for selling that 1975 with the Janus

best
John
www.octavecat.homestead.com

Hey all-
I just saw this tonight.

http://cgi.ebay.com/FENDER-RHODES-ELECTRIC-PIANO-MARK-I-STAGE-PIANO-73-KEY_W0QQitemZ7357945418QQcategoryZ29552QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Quite frankly, I don't get it. $1225 for a regular stage Rhodes ?? Ladies and gentlman, this is a bastard Rhodes. It has a 1978 harp/tine assortment with a pre-1975 namerail. Why would anyone bid this high for basically a 1978 Rhodes? Seller says it comes with no legs to boot.  Im so glad I only paid 250 for mine

best
John
www.octavecat.homestead.com

Thanks for the tips there.
Last night after I started this thread, I went to work on my Rhodes. I took the ENTIRE thing apart and Once I got to the plastic hammers, I unscrewed the 5 screws that hold them down.

Upon futher "investigation", I did learn that the hammers are pretty much always uneven. You're right- the hammers and peds had nothing to do with the uneveness- this is the way they are on their own. The rhodes needs something more, perhaps backchecks and weights.

Sincerely,
Jame

Hello,
I'm new to this Rhodes group. Nice little community you all have here!
The reason I am posting this is because I am slowly but surely restoring a 73 key Rhodes, which is a November 1976 model. I'll never forget when I first played it. It was such a tragedy...clunky action, poor escapement, rock hard hammer tips...etc. I couldn't understand why it sounded so poor in quality.
Since that time, I have helped this piano a lot. It really sounds lush, very bright and stingy sounding (through stereo tremolo! A must for the Rhodes!). Though, it still has issues. Especially with specific keys.

1) My first question is, why do some of the plastic hammers sit higher than others? For the most part, they appear to be even, but a good amount of them rest too high (or maybe too low in some cases). What is the reason for this? Is there a clear way to reset the plastic hammers so that they are even? I have yet to take the damper assemblies and straighten them out (if needed), but could this be a remedy?

2) I've noticed that some of the hammer tips strike the tines in terrible places. Most of the hammer tips are centered with the tip, but some (maybe 3-4) of the hammer tips barely hit the tine. The goal is to get each of the hammer tips centered with the tines. Re-adjusting the strike line seems moot, as it would just shift everything over. Is there a known procedure for straightening out specific keys?

Well, that's all I have for now. One thing I would like to do is post up some mp3' files of my Rhodes...especially some before/after material. The Rhodes has got to be one of the coolest things out there. And still available at such cheap prices! Anyone's input is highly encouraged and appreciated! Thanks for reading!

Jame