Messages

For anyone who thinks otherwise, Ray says himself he used a Rhodes, check it out:

Thanks for posting that, "closer to it" is one of my desert island LP's: full of great songs & a great recording too

I finally got to see Brian Auger play, a couple years ago. Fantastic! Legend

Even got a chuckle when I accused him of using his ipad for everything, and just hauling the Hammond around for show

Thinking about this: Ray must have been playing through an amplifier, how else could the band hear what he was doing?

I don't see any monitor headphones and I doubt they had return lines from the 8 track running back into a monitor

So I bet they took a DI off the twin reverb. Although there is clearly a mic on the twin, you can see the stand in the pics

Haha, then he goes on to say:

"He wasn't playing through an amplifier"

So there goes that theory 

He must have had a vibrato footpedal though, as the rail on the MKI in those shots is stock

I am wondering if they took a DI out of the Twin Reverb?

Otherwise how did Ray get the trem on & off?

It would also explain the lack of footswitch noise, that surely would have been picked up, if that Twin had been miked

Saw an interview with Bruce Botnick, who says the Rhodes was recorded DI into the mixing console

He even isolates a few seconds of it from a mixing board

It's in the "mr mojo risin' " documentary

fwiw I have used

Eventide Timefactor
Carl Martin Delayla
Fulltone Tube Tape Echo

with my MK1 and they all worked well

that is a good tip!! thanks

 Eminor, thx for posting that outtake!

and based on the photos, we can deduce the trem was the from Fender Twin & not the Rhodes, as a MK1 stage doesn't have trem

if he *was* playing a piano bass, it must have been plugged into the twin along with the MK1, as the trem syncs up right/left hand

and that twin by Jim's feet might have been Robby's, miked from behind? I don't see a mic in front of it

of course, I am assuming that the pics are depicting the setup they used, for this particular song: quite possibly they moved things around, and we don't have any photos of the actual recording in question

hey that is a great idea! I never thought of supporting it from the inside

thank you!

actually it may be wise to add a 3rd hinge too, in the middle

 I want to add metal support pieces to the 2 back corners on a MK1 that do not have any metal pieces on them...

the back of the bottom half, that sits under the top. they have to just wrap around, with no lip, I believe?

does anyone know where I can find something like this?

thanks!

*edit* reason is: I leave the lid up vertical, against a wall, and the weight is starting to pull at the corner seams of the bottom cab. But if those corners had support, it would be fine

yeah my MK1A just has regular Robertson headed woodscrews. But they are probably not original

hey pretty neat ideas!

 another thing: I don't think the amp Ray used was a twin. it looks too tall to me, and the top speakers are side-by-side. so I think it's a 4x10 silver face Fender amp? SF twins had the speakers mounted diagonally

*edit* I guess I am wrong about that! the amp by Jim's feet is a twin and the speakers are side-by-side. weird my '73 SF twin was diagonal

 ha! well it is interesting to speculate!

why don't you ask your friend, to ask Robby what he remembers?

a piano bass would be conspicuous on top of the MKI, especially as it's not in any of the pictures of the sessions in their LA workplace

actually, I've always wondered where Robby's gtr amp was, as I think the amp by Jim's feet was a vocal monitor? maybe Robby had it in the other room? there is a darker Fender amp against the wall, but the other gtr player was plugged into it. and I saw an unused Twin beside the drum kit, against the wall on Ray's side

hmm, possible, but it doesn't sound like a piano bass to me: it has the fuller sound of a regular MKI to my ears?

especially check out the 2 loud notes at 3:14 & 4:06 in that isolated track

 I have been trying to figure out the bass signal in this isolated recording: at first I thought it was just room bleed, or maybe he dubbed the bass seperately...it almost sounds like a different instrument compared to the right hand, since the level is drastically lower

  *edit* I just realized Ray is not playing bass at all, until 1 minute. but you CAN hear the bleed from the bass guitar up until then. afterwards you have the bass gtr bleed plus Ray's left hand

but at 3:14 & 4:06 he hits a bass note that is almost as loud as the lead. So I think Ray was just playing the left hand much quieter than the right

if they had an 8 track I doubt they would have split up the keys

  if vibrato was a footswitch, and that Fender amp is down by his feet, I'd think you might hear the click?

I hear vibrato from the beginning of the track until 1 min. then it turns off

and at 1:35 it sure kicks up! must have been a footwitch. then 1:58 switches off again. or maybe when they mixed it later on they added something?

 I agree on the more spartan sound quality of Animals; even though it is one of my favourite albums, the production isn't on the same level as their other post '73 albums.

It does match the song material though: edgier and more raw sounding

I have to assume the band felt the same way, as they never did anything else in that studio they built, AFAIK?

  DSOtM and WYWH were done at Abbey Road, which has stellar gear, preamps, mixing boards etc

The Wall was done in various places, but most of it in LA I believe ( with some preliminary material from Superbear in France? ) and it is one of the crown jewels of analog recording, IMO

So they built their own studio in Britannia Row, recorded Animals, and then abandoned it. Strange? maybe they had to leave England due to tax reasons etc

as for the rhodes sound, that was the recording that got me hooked, initially

seems like it has a subtle amount of echo on it, like they mixed in some room sound

although I hear more bass in the left channel, and more treble in the right. so maybe they fed it through a leslie?

hmm no I don't think it's a leslie as the stereo pan is pretty consistent

hey those first two clips were fantastic, thx for posting!

( every time I see a CTI label on a record, I buy it. they all sound good! )

here's to Creed Taylor, he's still alive

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creed_Taylor

thanks everyone!

I will do some AB tests when I have time, with the cover off & see if it makes any difference going direct via RCA vs the front 1/4" jack

that is a good point about a preamp/amp negating any benefit of the DI

great pics!!

and nice keyboards

how do you find that Echolette? a tech told me to stay away from the due to parts rarity & maintenance issues, but I always dug the look of them

never had a chance to try one out though

you can see in the pics, where those plates are getting stressed & will eventually break, without the support on that edge

!!!

wow! that makes a lot of sense, and explains everything. I was knocking my brains trying to figure out why they'd build it like that

someone must have pulled them off at some point, and reinstalled them incorrectly

unless they came that way from the factory?

bizarre.

I can't find the other pin, but I know it's jammed inside somewhere. argh

Thanks Tim!!

aha, yes it may have gone to one of those screws

thanks Sean!!

those are good points, thanks!

I wonder if I could just snake the RCA splitter 2nd output out somewhere unobtrusive, and leave it?

the harp cover sits flat ( well, on an angle but in contact all around ) so it would pinch the RCA cable

I have a moog grandmother and a bunch of other stuff on top of the cover, so there is a lot of weight there

I'm not sure where to re-attach that white ground wire?

at least, I assume it's a ground. will check the wiring

for posterity, here are some pics

I was looking at the wiring in my MKI, and the signal going to the tone/vol controls is just fed via an RCA jack + cable from the back of the harp

I hear a lot of people advising to bypass of the tone/vol controls, for recording

what I propose to do is just add an RCA splitter cable back there. it would:

1. retain the existing vol/tone control output
2. add a second 1/4" output that feeds from the other RCA, which would be DI

I would need to drill a 2nd output jack on the front of the panel though. there is lots of room there, to the left of the existing 1/4"

any reason not to do this? not keen on drilling holes in vintage stuff, but it would be pretty unobtrusive, and very useful.

I could even use both outputs to feed stereo/multiple signal paths

 you know, since the pins go right through the end blocks, I wonder why they didn't just use a clip that slides through a hole in the pins to keep them from sliding inward?

anyway, here are pics of mine. the right side I jammed a pencil in there, until I can find where that pin is, inside the keyboard!

thanks!

I believe there are 2 plates on the damper bar, that hold a guide/tube the pins fit into

but the pins spin freely inside them, and slide out all the time

I'll take a couple pics

maybe it's possible to tighten them? I never thought of that assumed there was something ( missing ) that held them, on the other side of the wooden harp supports

the two 2" pins that hold my damper rail in ( at each end ) keep sliding out and falling into the inside of the rhodes, getting lost

I am afraid to move the thing. actually one of them is inside somewhere, and I can't find it

is there a common fix for this? I can't imagine all the touring musicians of the past 50 years having to deal with this?

I almost want to get a single long piece of rod instead, running the width of the chassis. but it would be tough to install

thanks!

ps it is a MK IA from 1971, stage model

good to know, and thx for the welcome!

haha, yes funny reading my posts progress towards a solution

glad this forum is here, wouldn't have figured it out otherwise!

well, it looks like I need to replace the felt on the tops of the pedestals

  I added a small piece of felt to a pedestal to test, and it raised the hammer up ( too high: but it exaggerated the effect and stopped the hammer from hitting the key extension )

made me realize the old felt must be worn flat from use: that 1/8" or however thick the felt is, makes a huge difference

the hammers in the most used section of the keybed are doing this, mostly around & below middle C

so something must be worn out: but I can't figure out what needs replacing. I could put some cork/felt on the wooden part of the key to dampen the thunk, but seems to me the back of the hammer shouldn't be falling low enough to hit & rebound from the key extension in the first place

I was just wondering about this: my Stage 73  is labelled a Mark 1A as well

for posterity my date stamps are 50 70 top right, and 07 71 lower right

I opened it up: the hammers that are making the noise are actually touching ( and hitting ) the wooden part of the keys, while the silent ones have about 1/8" gap

also one of the pegs for the sustain bar must have fallen out & is hiding inside somewhere

 been looking around this site, what a great resource!

there is a date stamp of 1970 on the top right, 50th week. so I guess it's a 1970/early 1971. almost 50 years old

high register hammer tips are tapered wood core with rubber instead of square wood, so I guess those got replaced at some point

have an old Stage 73 from 1972 or so,

some of the keys have a loud wood/plastic *clunk/thwack* sound when you release them

I assume the hammer is hitting something on the rebound?

I pulled the top off and can see the hammers bouncing after release: all of them bounce, but only some make the loud wooden THWACK sound

did a bit of research, and apparently these early ones did not have felt on the hammers. do I need to add felt to the hammers?

thx!