Messages

I own one, which I've totally refurbed.  The insides -- and sound capabilities --are identical to any Rhodes of the same era.  (Mine is a 1973.) The built-in (10 watt) amp and speaker might be handy for practice, but I get much better sound bypassing it, tapping directly off the harp into a keyboard amp.

It's very heavy, so you wouldn't want to gig with it.  But, with its walnut cabinet all polished up, it looks very cool in my house. And because people aren't nostalgic about them (Chick Corea probably never played one), I paid maybe 1/3 the price of a decent Stage piano in my area.

You're right...the old Small Stone are way better than the new one. With the new one, i had this volume drop problem. It was the violet version from the end of the 90's. So i sold it. But the day i can find an old Small Stone from the seventies, i will take it. I know how it sounds...

I bought a USA re-issue two weeks ago.  The volume drop was minimal.  But after about a week, the volume drop was really bad. Tested the 9 volt battery, which had gotten very little use, and it tested 5 volts. Replaced the battery, and again, the volume drop was minimal.

I think the pedal just eats batteries. That big red "on" light can't help.  I just invested $9.95 in a power supply. That ought to do the job. An awesome-sounding pedal, by the way.

Alan

I bypassed the Student Rhodes amp, and took the signal directly of the harp, into the pedal and to the keyboard amp.

Not only does the phaser pedal work silently with the amp, even when it's off, the sound of my Rhodes is totally transformed. The sound is so much clearer and more defined. It's a tremendous difference!

If you've got a student Rhodes, you really ought to try bypassing its amp.

Alan

Love the sound of my new Small Stone phaser, but I'm having trouble using it without getting a lot of noise.

I have a student Rhodes (with the built-in 10 watt amp), paired with a Peavey KB100 solid state amp. Without the Small Stone, I just turn the Rhodes amp about half-way, and use the auxillary output on the Rhodes to connect to the amp.  Everything works fine.

If I go from the aux output to the Small Stone and then to the Peavey, I get bad distortion, like I'm really overdriving the pedal.  If I turn down the Rhodes' amp volume, the distortion goes away.  But that means I have to turn up the volume considerably on the Peavey, which creates a lot of noise. (When the phaser is on, you hear a loud, whoosh...whoosh... whoosh sound; when it's off, I hear continuous noise.)

I'm not sure what to do. I could try going directly from the harp to the pedal. But then I'd be starting with a weaker signal, which would require the Peavey amp to be set even higher, right?

There's also an earphone output from the Rhodes amp.  Maybe I can get an output signal from it.  But while it looks like a standard ¼" output, it seems to be shorter inside. (When I stick a ¼" plug in it, the plug won't go in all the way.)

I just bought the Small Stone on ebay. It's a USA re-issue model. Cosmetically, it arrived in mint condition, and I have no reason to believe there is any problem with the pedal itself.

Any suggestions?

Thanks,

Alan

I went back through the thread and found James' suggestion that you let the note ring out for a second and tune to that sound. Good suggestion!

In the past, I had trouble using some software called "Instrument Tuner" to do the job.  The pitch display just jumped all over the place when I hit a note. Yesterday, I found a free trial version of something called "Tune Lab Pro", which is designed for Windows.  http://www.tunelab-world.com/tlp.html  I used James' advice and the software worked quite well. I did an equal temperament tuning, and it sounds very nice.

A couple of other tips I've learned.  First, it's best to leave the harp in place and strike the tine with the key/hammer, with about the same force as it's usually played.  (The alternate method is to lift the harp and pluck the tine. I don't think that's nearly as accurate.)  But with the harp in place, it's hard to reach the tuning spring. Try grabbing it with a curved hemostat. It works perfectly.  (I bought three on ebay for $5.)

Then, I went direct from the RCA plug on the harp into the sound card. No mic needed.

I'm quite pleased with the results.  

Alan

>Easy to see the complex Rhodes tine vibration resolve into the fundamental tone.>

When I've tried to tune my Rhodes, I've had trouble figuring whether I should tune to the initial sound you get when you strike the tine, or the sound you get a second later when it rings out.  This seems especially problematic in the bass section, where the tine vibrates pretty widely.

So, are you tuning to the sustained tone -- or to that initial tone?

(Whichever you pick, it seems like a Rhodes is never perfectly locked into tune, since the pitch does vary as the note rings out.  In some ways, the slightly off tune sound seems like one of the funky, defining characteristics of the Rhodes sound.)

Alan

>>Were you able to actually find tips that worked for the KMC?

I bought one and found out that it needed a bunch of tips replaced.  

I took it to a guy the works on rhodes all the time.  

He said that replacement tips (the square felt kind) were impossible to find and that replacing them with neoprene tips didn't work right.  

He suggested I just get rid of it?!?!?!  >>


Mine is a 1973 model. It came with square neoprene tips that I replaced with triangular neoprene tips -- and it works just fine.

I've never heard of square felt tips on a Rhodes. For the earlier models with teardrop-shaped felt hammers, try Vintage Vibe:

http://tinyurl.com/y4z6pu

Alan

thats odd that they go for less, it seems like they're pretty rare. I would think they'd  go for more for collectible reasons. Unless the people that sell them aren't really aware of their value.

I think there are two significant reasons why they sell for less:  First, while they're nice for a home or studio, they are impractical (too heavy) for gigging. Also ,I think a lot of the basis for the prices of all Rhodes pianos -- and other vintage keyboards -- is based on nostalgia.  You never saw Herbie Hancock or Ray Charles play a student piano.

I see the same thing in the market for Hammond organs.  You can easily pay $5,000 or more for a vintage B3.  An A-100 (which is electronically and mechanically identical to the B-3, and typically is in far better shape than most B3s because they were made to sit in living rooms) can be had for far less.  People will pay outrageous prices to get that classic B3 "coffin on legs" cabient look -- even if the instrument is all beat up.

Alan

Ah yes thankyou! Wonder how much it will go for...

I bought one a year ago for $200 (US, midwest), which might have been a couple hundred $$ less than typical.  It was complete, and in pretty good shape; just needed some "consummable" parts replaced (grommets, hammer tips, pedestal felts) to get it in excellent working order.  Seems like they go for considerably less than a Stage or Suitcase model. You really wouldn't want to gig with it, but it's otherwise quite nice.

Alan

I experimented with the ty-wrap mod on my 1973, but didn't really like the clattery sound it created after I glued a few ty-wrap pieces on top of my pedestal felts.  So, I started working on other adjustments.  When I was done, the action was fine without any mod.  Here's what I posted about this a couple months ago:

In early December, on a whim, I bought a 1973 student Rhodes in a nice walnut case. 15 notes didn't work at all. The action felt like an invitation to carpal tunnel, and it was full of buzzes and dead-sounding notes. Knowing nothing about these beasts – and having quite modest technical skills – I turned to a couple Rhodes discussion groups for help, and started sorting through the "you can do it posts" and the "you need to have supernatural powers and years of experience to make these things work" posts. At the least, I figured, I bought the Rhodes really cheap, and could easily re-sell it if I was unable to bring it back to life... But why not try?

Today, it sounds fantastic, looks good, and the action is so nice that there is absolutely no need to do the ped mod I had planned. In between, I cleaned everything, replaced a dead pickup, installed new pedestal felts, grommets and hammer tips, replaced a bad hammer flange, lubed all the felts, replaced 15 missing bridle straps, lowered the harp, re-set the strike line, fine-tuned the dampers, touched-up the cabinet, replaced the missing "73" logo, stretch-tuned it with software I found on the web, and re-voiced it. I worked slowly and methodically, and enjoyed doing it. Now, it's a pleasure to play and a fine complement to my Hammond B2 and two Leslies with which it shares a room in my home.

So, there are two points to this post.

First, thanks to all for the help (including a lot of you who have no idea that you helped me, since I found your advice in the archives.) A special shout-out to some folks who helped offlist (Steve Hayes and Ted Thompson of Speakeasy Vintage, John Della Vecchia and James Page).

Second, some encouragement for others in my situation. If I can do this, you can, too. Aside from the electronics on some models, these are relatively simple devices. With the many talented, experienced techs you can connect with on the Web (as well as the service manual and sources of parts), you CAN get the job done. Read the archives, study the service manual, ask questions to fill-in the blanks, and get going!

Alan

(X-posted to two other Rhodes groups)

In early December, on a whim, I bought a 1973 student Rhodes in a nice walnut case.  15 notes didn't work at all. The action felt like an invitation to carpal tunnel, and it was full of buzzes and dead-sounding notes.  Knowing nothing about these beasts – and having quite modest technical skills – I turned to a couple Rhodes discussion groups for help, and started sorting through the "you can do it posts" and the "you need to have supernatural powers and years of experience to make these things work" posts.  At the least, I figured, I bought the Rhodes really cheap, and could easily re-sell it if I was unable to bring it back to life...  But why not try?

Today, it sounds fantastic, looks good, and the action is so nice that there is absolutely no need to do the ped mod I had planned. In between, I cleaned everything, replaced a dead pickup, installed new pedestal felts, grommets and hammer tips, replaced a bad hammer flange, lubed all the felts, replaced 15 missing bridle straps, lowered the harp, re-set the strike line, fine-tuned the dampers, touched-up the cabinet, replaced the missing "73" logo, stretch-tuned it with software I found on the web, and re-voiced it.  I worked slowly and methodically, and enjoyed doing it.  Now, it's a pleasure to play and a fine complement to my Hammond B2 and two Leslies with which it shares a room in my home.

So, there are two points to this post.

First, thanks to all for the help (including a lot of you who have no idea that you helped me, since I found your advice in the archives.)  A special shout-out to some folks who helped offlist (Steve Hayes and Ted Thompson of Speakeasy Vintage, John Della Vecchia and James Page).

Second, some encouragement for others in my situation.  If I can do this, you can, too.  Aside from the electronics on some models, these are relatively simple devices.  With the many talented, experienced techs you can connect with on the Web (as well as the service manual and sources of parts), you CAN get the job done.  Read the archives, study the service manual, ask questions to fill-in the blanks, and get going!

Alan

Your post was really helpful.  I think that I, too, ought to tune to the initial strike tone of a moderate hammer hit.  

Another thing that may be helpful is that it appears that my tuning software offers an option in which you can choose which harmonics to display.  I've not yet tried this, but if I set it just for the fundamental, it ought to help me focus better on that.

Another problem I've noticed, however, is that I can't seem to get some of the tines flat enough to be on pitch.  (I've got the spring actually sliding off the edge of the tine -- and it's still not quite enough.)

Are there heavier tuning springs that can be used on the bass notes?  Or can you use two springs on a tine?  It doesn't appear that those tines were cut too short, since they are as close the pickups as any other tines. Any ideas about this?

Thanks,

Alan

Thanks for the tips. I didn't realize that you might produce a different pitch by plucking the tine, rather than playing it. I'll also try letting the vibrating bass tines "settle down" before I take a pitch measurement.

I gathered a tip on another list that ought to be helpful in allowing anyone to adjust the tuning springs while the harp is in its normal position.  The suggestion was to use a "hemostat" -- a surgical tool that looks like a scissors with a tip made to grip small things, rather than cut them. The poster said he used a hemostat with a curved tip to grab the tuning spring between the tone bars.  Using that, he said he could move the spring more precisely than what you might be able to do by pushing it with a screwdriver or one of those Rhodes tuning tools.  Really sounds like it would work well.

Alan

(This message X-posted to Rhodes Yahoo group.)

I've been using Instrument-Tuner software to tune my Rhodes, and could use a little advice.  I'm running direct from the harp output into the sound card on my laptop, and I've created a tuning protocol based on the stretch tuning diagram in the Rhodes service manual.

In the middle registers, the notes are easy to tune.  In the upper registers, I find it more difficult to be accurate, since the tines are so short that even the slightest movement of the tuning spring causes a large change in the tuning, but with some patience, it works pretty well.

I'm finding the most difficulty in the lower registers.  When I pluck the tine (even if I do it gently, up near the tone generator), the tines vibrate pretty widely, and the frequency readings on the software jump up and down wildly. I figure I'm getting overtones as the tine moves -- or maybe even sympathetic vibrations from adjacent tines. If I look at the wave form readout, I can see several waves of different frequencies. I tried putting the harp down and hitting the tine with the hammer tip -- and then releasing the note quickly so the damper will deaden the sound before overtones ring out.  That didn't seem to work any better.

The software offer several different methods - meter, strobe, waveform etc.  Any suggestions for a different method to use (either with the software or in how I am triggering the tine) that would make my lower register tuning more accurate?

Thanks,

Alan