Andy Burton Compares the Hammond XK-5 to a Vintage Hammond B-3
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 лип 2018
- Acclaimed keyboardist Andy Burton (John Mayer, Cyndi Lauper, Rufus Wainwright, Little Steven and the Disciples of Soul) compares the new Hammond XK-5 portable organ to his vintage 1971 Hammond B-3 and Leslie 122 speaker.
When you consider the difference in technology, and how hard it is to replicate analogue to digital, Hammond has nailed their own tone superbly
is the xk 5 being ran through a leslie? or is it all board settings?
Wow, sounds the same to me. I don't play anything, but I was a Sonar Tech 50 years ago. :)
Man, hats off to the people that made this product happen. I can't imagine how small of a market there must be for this vs the amount of effort that went into producing it.
Also, thanks for a review that is relatable even to folks like me that are fascinated by music and sound but have no talent for it.
b3 is way beter.............XK5 IS TO DECEIVE FOOLS, unique advantage is portable..........aparently, (no paing atention) they seems equal or litle diference, mainly at first sight............BUT SOLID STATE NEVER HAVE THE WEIGHT OF A TUBED. (weight, life, size). xk5 is the same scam of solid state amps
Thanks for the test--- I'm impressed with the incredible electronic mimicry of this classic analog instrument. :)
Thanks for the demo - you provided a great service to those of us who want to know which clone has the purist, closest, and most tweakable sounds - thanks again!
I would more than happy with the XK-5, sounds fantastic!
Right on, Andy! Great comparison and I would have to say that the XK5 is the real deal. Nice playing and already has me playing the drawbar configurations you used and your progressions. Have fun out there and thanks very much for this video.
May sound similar, but you still can't beat the feel and lightness of the Hammonds waterfall keys that make you fly across those keys when doing runs!!! Nothing like the real TG!!!
That was a lot of fun. enjoyed this video. Just ordered the entire set up HAMMOND XK 5 PRO SYSTEM w/ LESLIE 3300. cannot wait to get mine. I am getting 2 LESLIE 3300's
Hey, I love your Tamla Motown t-shirt! Huge U.S. Motown fan here since 1964! Sorry for the interruption. Just needed to comment on your great taste in Motown music!
Having played Hammond all my life (since 1955), but never having played the Suzuki version, this is fascinating to watch - and I'm impressed with how well they did. I used to have a Roland JX-10 with a from-scratch tone creator, which build from sine waves, square waves, sawtooth, etc., and found it was easier to make a sorta-B3 than almost any other type of tone (since the Hammond concept is built pretty much on sine waves).
you played the heaven keyboard for years and betray it so easily???? b3 is way beter.............XK5 IS TO DECEIVE FOOLS, unique advantage is portable..........aparently, (no paing atention) they seems equal or litle diference, mainly at first sight............BUT SOLID STATE NEVER HAVE THE WEIGHT OF A TUBED. (weight, life, size). xk5 is the same scam of solid state amps
FYI, the last 17 seconds, starting at 18:00 say more about his actual opinion/conclusion than the preceding 18 minutes: "I'll be playing a real B3..."
Brilliant demonstration
Close enough, and a lot easier to move the potable around. Great video!
I schlepped a C3 around to gigs for a while back in the day ... it was a beast!
Madness, but cool that you did. There's nothing digital that can equal the depth and charachter of the real thing.
@@loganwhite8375 maybe.
I used to haul my B3 to gigs, too. But that was back when I played a minimum of week long gigs. Had one gig in Seattle for close to a year. So moving it was doable. The bench bit the dust long ago from abuse during moving and performing. The organ is beat up about like the one in the video here. My 122 is beat up, too. But they still sound great! It's hard to believe I considered selling them about 15 years ago. The B3 is from 1957 by the way.
@@davidmccall4776 I'm trying to remember what comment I was replying to
In the 70's, my Dad had a B-3 and Leslie speaker in the living room. Imagine the room we would've had if the XK-5 was around then.
In the 70's I had the family (inherited) grand piano in my bedroom,
in my first house (not much more than a cottage).
I had to sleep on the floor partially under it.
Dad sounds like a cool guy! Big up!😎
If only Jon Lord were here to hear the XK-5.
But I really wouldn't want to see him (or Emerson, or J. Smith) playing one of these! Old schoolers should play the beasts - it's only natural!
He'd spit on it and either play a Mojo, Legend or the "Purple" UHX3-powered Mag Organ like Don Airey. The XK5's emulation is embarassing for today's standard and for the price they ask.
@@SciFiArtman Too bad. There's a video of Keith Emerson playing the new digital B3 and praising it.
@@BrunodeSouzaLino Oh sure, Keith seemed like a modern man, and was always open to the latest and greatest! But I personally relate him, more than any other keyboardist, to real grand pianos and real Hammonds. Maybe it's just my old school image of him. Like seeing old fave guitarists playing through Marshalls and HiWatts (when they actually recorded through 30w 10in. Voxs or Fenders). Images linger, and memories are golden!
Jon Lord. Almost in every note you can hear him. Well said.
This was a fantastic video and comparison.
The XK 5 is tinnier I would say but thw advantage of not hauling a real B-3 make the difference not so significant
The sound of the overdrive on the XK5 😍😍
A really great comparison, thanks
If you're running the xk-5 thru the b3 pre, doesn't that defeat the purpose of the comparison?
exactly
Not really. My XK-1c rig is set up to run through the Hammond C3's "phono" jack or I can take it direct to the Leslie on the road. It's slightly warmer through the C, but you need a pretty good ear to hear it. For a comparison, however, I'd likely want to bypass the C3 amp. Because not everyone is going to have a B3/C3 around the house.
The RCA input (phono input) on a Hammond B,C or A100 is right before the final pre-amp stage (a 12AX7 and a 12BU7) of the AO28 preamplifier and would only slightly effect the sound.
Surely the comparison is over the way the tones are generated, and nothing much to do with where you squirt the sound thereafter, whether through a B3 amp or a Leslie.
Chip Gaasche None of the magic takes place in the preamp. It just brings up the voltage, as transparently as posible, to drive the Leslie’s power amp. In this comparison, it is literally acting as a mixer. There would be no other way to compare the two keyboards with the same Leslie.
This video was playing the background while doing something else. Every time it drew my attention you where on you old one. New one makes sense but I'd treasure the old one. Also going by the acoustical sound the new keys make at times I imagine the old one to feel better.
Very awesome sounding B3 amazing.. XK-5. Like it. Your getting a nasty Deep Purple John Lord vibe there. Sounds like a great clone to me. Wow! Greg Rolly!! Vibe! Santana! Cool! Real close. Incredible.
Yes! 16:22 love to hear hammond but first i'm thankfull to learn all these stuff about the sounds and each technical descriptions.
The XK5 is hands down, virtually the best! Hammond engineers are, by far, incredibly talented! Thank you for the comparison! And, being an XK55 owner, there is so much more packed into the XK5! Hats off to Hammond! 🎹🎶🎹
b3 is way beter.............XK5 IS TO DECEIVE FOOLS, unique advantage is portable..........aparently, (no paing atention) they seems equal or litle diference, mainly at first sight............BUT SOLID STATE NEVER HAVE THE WEIGHT OF A TUBED. (weight, life, size)
I appreciate including the contact points as one of the similarities between the B3 and the XK5.....wherever you r on the B3 journey it will always b about what you want to hear....
Nice job on the comparison! I am impressed with the sound of the poseur. Running it through the B-3 preamp and the Leslie is a true side-by-side comparison under the same initial conditions. If I can't get a B-3 (and I can't), maybe I'll get an XK-5. Of course, then I'll still need the B-3 preamp and the Leslie and then... Oh well, I guess I'm stuck with my digital piano until I get some higher-paying gigs.
it always amazes me how much effort japanese manufacturers put into an instrument whenever they convert from something older to digital.
I play a 1954 C3 coupled to a Leslie 122 every Sunday🖤
Very interesting. I'd love to hear both without all of the effects and without running through the B3 amp. I'm not a tech but I am a musician and even listening here, I'm not hearing what you're hearing- exact as you say. Thanks for taking the time to record. I'm hanging on to my 1958 B3 :)
running an xk5 with the 2nd manual and the pedalboard...WHAT A KILLER SETUP...driving both into a Leslie 3300 for road use. Heavy and large, but not nearly as heavy and large as the "original"...
Used to play a Korg CX-3 through a "real" Leslie 122...talk about a killer sound. Worked great on the road!
Did the same thing, then got the updated CX-3 with improved Leslie simulator, dropped the Leslie. It was actually a slightly fuller sound compared to some B's I heard with 145's. Used to own an M-3 originally, they stopped hauling that around. I used to own a pipe organ, too, for that matter.
Impressionant merci
I really like this but one issue springs to mind: how is the audio going to the track that is on the video? Is it just the camera mic? If so, that really kinda blurs any noticeable distinction. Or did you put the mic'd stereo signal on in post?
Could You tell me- how did You connect Xk5 to B3s preamp? just thru xk5 L/mono output to RCA ao28 input on swell box?I understand that xk5 is switch on, B3 connected to Leslie 122 by 6pin cable also? I want to connect my sk2 hammond to C3 ao28 preamp with Leslie 122...and I wonder- is it healthy connection an digital organ to ao28 phono inpu...
Superb
If I remember correct the A-100 was Hammond's church organ, the C-100 was the cabinet version and the B-3 was the portable version if you had enough men to move it. It was heave. The number of tone wheel did change with each version. I worked on them in the 70s so things are not that clear today.
Nope, B-3, C-3 and A-100 -- only the cabinets were different.
Enjoyed the comparisons Jon Lord fan...………….Thanks Tony
Andy, Great Studio!! Thank you for the comparison. Like obci-US stated below, I agree "No two Hammonds will sound exactly the same". I have a 1962 C-3 with two - 122's - all 425 lbs just for the C-3 plus another 300 lbs for the 2 Leslies. It sounds great for studio but is not feasible to jam out playing a '60's and '70's set list. I have not tried the recent Hammond XK-5 series... the earlier ones just did not sound good to my ears and the leslie emulators just did not cut it. So, I started with the Voce V-3 (still have it) before in 2008, and for the past 10 years I have been using a Korg Gen 2 CX-3 Organ plugged in stereo into 2 - Roland KC-500 amps - so I can get the doppler effect of a leslie. I agree the sound of the XK-5 is dead on with your B-3. But, I would really like Keyboard Magazine to do a comparison of the XK-5's Leslie simulator to your 122. Candidly, that is what would drive my decision to purchase the XK-5 or just stay with the Korg until it dies. Thanks again and safe travels on your tour.
That Korg rules. I own one as well and will likely pick up a second.
Nicely done comparison, but having the microphones so close to a wall will dramatically color the sound due the in-phase and out-of-phase interference reflections (depending on frequency) caused by the wall. Placing the mics far from any reflective surface would be much better.
there is no difference in sound between a B3 and C3, just the cabinetry.
And don't forget the A100...which was basically a B3/C3 in a home cabinet with built in speakers.
A100 has a slight difference in the vib electronics and it all depends on the adjustments of tonecurve of the TG ,the individual magnets per tonewheel . not forgetting the mechanical noise produced by run motors and the whole lot that's turning inside an old Ham , the interaction on the wiring capacitive , inductive couplings , magnetic strayfields of the transformers ,the complete lot of background noise . you can never compare handbuilt instruments to modern mass production things
Hi I'm a bit green on the specs B3 and C3 but quite a while ago I heard it said that its the same organ. The UK calls it a B3 and the USA calls it a C3 with the same sound. Is this correct?
@@eyuptony Just the cabinetry is different.
@@brunoprimas1483 Thanks Bruno. Ether, either what a fantastic sounding organ. Tony.
This and your rig rundown vid using the A-3; I'm sold...now an A-3 is at the top of my gear acquisition list whilst I enjoy my Skx and Vox Continental 73.
Got my A-3, sounds great, almost as good as my '62 A-102 with matching Leslie 142. ;)
Your review was the final push I needed to get my A-3. Cheers!
Looks like your 71 B3 has seen the road. Of all the Hammonds I’ve owned, my 55 B had the best tone.
Other than amp differences, I think my A100 coils were setup differently than my B’s. We use to push them in further trying to get more volume.
Yes! I too use to run my DX7 thru my Leslie’s! Yamaha’s Aftertouch mag published my DX7 B3 pgm’ing method & patch.
Given the situation I'd rather like to see a comparison of that XK5 against A Clavia, a Legend and a Crumar Mojo, all passed thtough the same setup ( clone --> AO28 --> Leslie --> microphones) and compared A-B instantly. BTW I think that even a clone of 20+ years ago, like the Korg CX3, would play very close to the B3 when passed through the same setup. Just my 2 cents
Oh hello Mr Burton i have the XK1 and Roland VK7 sir and 2 Neo Ventilators Mark1 and 2 with a Hammond Leslie G pedal and its a blast
Good that you show how the test was conducted, but running the XK5 over the AO-28 is not fair.
Keep raking the keys I think I hear a difference in the plastic
🤣
🤦🏾♂️🤦🏾♂️🤦🏾♂️🤦🏾♂️🤣🤣🤣
🤣
Amen.
with drum and bass won't be difference ! Is matched at factory... !
I would like to hear the XK-5 played WITHOUT the benefit of the old preamp/Leslie. On many gigs, it´s unlikely that a keyboard player(like myself! ) will have the luxury of a genuine B3/122 at their disposal. especially a vintage jewel as shown in this video. I have used an older model of the XK-5 run through stereo monitoring and while it did the job, I was not truly impressed by the Leslie emulator. However same instrument run through a 122 sounded legit! Leads me to believe that the Leslie speaker is largely responsible for bringing any organ to life!!
There's another video comparison you can search for that runs both organs on their own through a leslie.
The best answer short of a 122 is the Neo vent. For $500 it does a great job and for the Jon Lord sound there are good stomp boxes coupled with the vent to get what one needs short of the actual cab and Marshall Jon Lord used among other things. He didn’t get into the XK5 overdrive in this video however, just the amp drive section.
"And now the XK-5, on the B3...setting" 😂I see what you did there!😃
What do you think of the nord c2d vs the xk5? Which would you prefer?
I would say this is anything BUT a true side by side. If the emulator is supposed to be any good it should stand up to the B3 without having to run it through the B3's preamp.
He ran through the preamp because it is difficult to connect a clone to a 122 without the proper outboard preamp. There were some preamps available that did this, but they are not that common. I was the cofounder of Speakeasy Vintage Music back in the day and still have one of our 122 preamps. Thought about putting them back in production from time to time, but it is a labor intensive exercise to make these preamps which does not leave a whole lot of $$$ on the table at the end of the day. There are a number of ways to connect up a 147 - Combo Preamp, Dr. Fishsticks, Speakeasy, Bill Brown, etc. Generally, the old Hammond and Leslie stuff need to be restored at this point and the clone probably sounds more like a factory fresh B3 from back when they were new than the old B3. I just restored a 142 Leslie and every capacitor in was shot, including the crossover capacitor.
Hey, it's 2024 and the SK-Pro is quite a bit newer and lighter (especially for gigging with 2 manuals...), and it has an apparently improved Leslie sim. Which would you choose, for gigging: SK-Pro 2 manual or, for the same money or less, the XK-5 upper manual only, with a controller for the lower board? (maybe getting the lower board down the line). Thank you, wish I had that 122 of yours! I do have 1969 E-112, my dad bought it for me in July, 1969.
Did you account for the B3’s preamp tone adjustment?
Since most players are going to use the Suzuki without a Leslie, I’d also compare them completely separately.
***Would be interesting to compare the drawbar signals on an oscilloscope.***. The drawbar outputs on all my vintage tone wheel B3’s, and other Hammonds I’ve owned, all noticeably did the boogie a little bit. (Most likely due to slop from the mechanical tone wheels). I had an old 70’s Univox drawbar keyboard 🎹 where the drawbar outputs were just solid sine waves.
***One things for sure..,, 50yrs down the road the tone wheel B3 will STILL be working!!!! “Our 1955 B3 is still going strong! And it’s a screamer, compared to our later B3’s”. I’m a retired BSEE, IC design/test, and the caps on our older Hammonds are obviously from a different manf era. It seems the coil adjustments must have a slight chg over time too. I pushed in the ones on one of my Hammonds, as far as they’d go, to increase the output. I was trying to get Keith Emerson’s 70’s sound. I also cranked the hi end & got there! 😎👍
and by the way there is no two B3's sounding exactly the same they all have certain tolerances in the TG adjustings . what about the warm smell of oil and the wood when you play an oldie ? You can't compare the old to the new stuff .
There ain't nothing like the real thing. Digital is the total opposite of all that is real and natural. A real Hammond tone wheel/tube amp organ has a presence and charachter that nothing else can touch.
The originals always sound the best.
Well, maybe. But you don't need four guys and a truck to move the XK-5. And you don't have to worry about 50 year-old mechanical parts breaking down. It's easy to be a purist when you don't have to deal with the problems that an original B-3 owner faces.
What tune were you playing at 2:45 ? So cool ...
Subtle differences but the XK5 is an awseome machine. Did Procol Harum's Matthew Fisher play a B3 or M103?
I'm just happy with my Roland VK-8.
Good sound there, I have a xk3c, what are the difference for you?
Excellent review Andy! The SK-5 does an amazing job at capturing the B3 mechanical tones. I apologize that my following 2 cents may have been mentioned numerous times previously, but I didn’t want to page thru almost 400 comments. I am the second owner of a 63’ B3 that was never a road warrior. It is completely original. A big consideration would be the wax caps. Less volume is one result indicating failing caps. I won’t re-cap as I am only 11 years older than the B. There are arguments over the pros and cons, but finally to my point! I would bet all SK-5’s sound pretty much identical. That claim could definitely not made with any vintage, unmodified models in the Hammond line-they have developed a tone that is unique between themselves. Some are pretty similar sounding but some sound remarkably and noticeably different. Although the judgment as to good or bad is subjective, the difference is real. Just sayin’.
I'm, only a trumpet player, but don't really see this as a true comparison to see how the keyboard compares to the B3.. How many players will bring out both to a gig? I would want to hear the Suzuki keyboard with a straight line to a Leslie or amp with no help from the B3's pre amp.... Am I wrong? Even this way, you can still certainly tell the difference.
Bob Viavattine the purpose of the comparison was to test certain aspects of the XK5’s sonic character against the same aspects of the B3. I could have taken a line out of the B3 and listened to the direct output of each, but that would have been very “dry”. I now have an adapter that will take the XK5’s Leslie 11- pin output and connect it to my vintage 122. This would have involved constant plugging and unplugging to compare. Which I could have done by stopping the video.
No one would take both to a gig - unless maybe the B3 were your main axe and the XK5 were your backup. What you want is a different video. It would show the XK5 falling short of the mark - as all clones would. To be fair to Hammond/Suzuki I’d need to include some competing clones to show how they fall short as well. I hope this illuminates my reasons for doing it this way.
Is the B3 through a leslie - and XB-5 with the built in leslie? Or are both going through a real leslie?
It's a shame Suzuki didn't see fit to install a larger display to the XK-5
Very good review. What people hear is 'highly' influenced by what they see while listening. I listened 'without watching' using studio grade headphones and I could not consistently guess which organ was being played. You've shown that the XK-5 can be tweaked to sound as good as a vintage B3 if a person is willing to spend the time to program it and mate it with a 122 leslie. Anything less than that simply will not cut it. Again, great job!
Yep; that leslie is integral as all f*ck....
True. We definitely watch with our eyes. I would say that aspect influences the playing experience a lot though. You are inspired to play "traditionally" better on the real B3. The feel of the keys feeds into this concept in a big way. You will make creative decisions you wouldn't necessarily make on an emulation as a result. Ultimately, that is all that matters. However, I look at the Xk-5 and similar boards simply as synthesizers. You can achieve great sounds outside the typical B3 realm on them and create interesting music for sure. This is where they really shine. Having flexibility to easily mangle the sound through effects/amps/etc..is fantastic. Evolving the organ sound is hugely important too... But the raw emotion that comes from those moving parts just can't be recreated.
The original B3 was still being manufactured in 1971? I thought it had been discontinued.
Did you play the riff from Rod Stewart’s “Baby Jane” (down a step from Dm to Cm) at 10:00?
the B3 was discontinued in 1976.
late '74 was when the B3 ceased production, I believe. they kept making the H series a few more years, I believe.
1976, according to Wikipedia (and to my memory of reading it elsewhere).
The differences between the Hammond organs are the pre-amps and amps. The C-3 was a console but has it's own built-in speaker.
Great video. A pro can tell the difference, but honestly, the average person won't notice. It's like comparing a real grand piano to the patches in the Korg Kronos. The differences are so minor, you could say it's the difference of the instrument like the way all B3s sound different. Bringing a real B3 or Piano does give one a physical presence on the stage. I play an XK-5 dual manual with a Leslie 3300 and a Korg Kronos 88 in a 3DN tribute. That setup has everything I need. One bug on the XK-5, is if you accidentally swipe the black preset keys, the organ can get stuck on a note, and the only way to reset it is to power off and on.
Doesn't matter what he does to allow you to hear the comparison if people are listening through cheap speakers or horrible earphones.
At 34.6 pounds the xk-5 can take the rough stuff well and not go sliding off the keyboard stand. You are absolutely right about the stuck note thing. I can't get too carried away when I jump in the cat box with the multiple palm glissandos a la Emerson & Lord. It happened much more during the first year I owned it. I'm a bit more careful now.
- You're taking the XK5 through the AO-28. This is not a clear and complete comparison.
- Your 71 organ needs some work (see fast/slow prc decay)
- Takes nothing away from the fact the XK5 is the closest clone option out there. I want.
- Sidenote: One can learn a LOT about operation, hand position, smears and palms by studying some jazz organ.
My first thought, too - putting the XK5 through the AO-28 immediately changes the color; we're no longer hearing the true XK5 output. Considering how much importance there is to the "portable" aspect of the XK5 for gigging, I think a "real-B3+Leslie vs. XK5 with Leslie sim" comparison would demonstrate most what people really want to know. "Can I get the full experience on a gig with just the XK5?" (No.) Still, would be nice to really know!
@Mike Verta: ""Can I get the full experience on a gig with just the XK5?" (No.) " I absolutely agree, and i somehow hope it will always stay so. just like real concert grand pianos vs digital pianos, or real pipe organs vs digital pipe organs. i highly appreciate any progress in digital instruments, they can be so useful in recording or practicing situations. but the real thing will always be the real thing.
I agree not a true comparison running through the AO
preamps especially tube ones add color and character. That being said I have an XK-3c and a leslie 2101 and they sound amazing and much lighter then a b3 and more practical for gigging .
Close enough.. and the bonus is its much lighter, more compact and much easier than hauling around a B3. And you don't need a van. If I were a keyboardist, I'd go w the XK-5 for gigging.
I think they did an impressive job with the new one
all very well but what about long term life ???? I own model A's , BC's and these are all 80years plus and still performing only needing a few drops off oil every year ... how long you think that new thing will last ??
As the owner of an XK3C and 2101, I can appreciate the extra punch the XK5 has but I don’t see an upgrade in my future. At my level which is still beginner after 11 years, the 3C is more than I’ll ever need. When I have played out - practice and a few recording sessions I bring my 15lb Roland VR09. I saw a vintage B3 in my future 10 years ago, but today if somebody showed up at my door with a free one I’d have to turn it down, no place to put it.
Have you tried the B3 MkII?
Does anyone know of any xk- giveaway’s?
...what with the ambience noise? how can we compare between the b3 and the clone with that?
never mention the fact that this comparison is unfair when you plug the xk5 thru the b3 tube pre-amp and the reel leslie.
a *true* comparison is when you record directly from the xk5 output, and put it in front the b3-tru-leslie-tru-2 condensers mics - without the sound from the onborad mic in the camera.
^^
Man I've rebuilt countess A028 Hammond preamps over the years...
It’s interesting ti become aware of new instruments out there especially if you’re on the road but Yes there is a difference between the B3hammond and Other Hammonds it’s very distinct sound. I have a B3 and a C2 it’s really according to the Leslie speaker you have. All Hammond’s sound the same to a degree but there are unique personalities and variations that can be determined by those who’ve lived long enough to Decipher
Do they make a dual manual version?
The real B3 has a thicker sound with more low mids. The digital version sounds a little brasher.
Might be subjective but I also hear that. Either less output at some frequencies or an overall lower "shelf" output, IMHO.
a real b3 component ages.
this emukate a new one.. that never detoriate. that is why.
@@flatearthermorons2580 With good ears and an engineer and some analog class A outboard gear, compressor and EQ, you can match what you are looking for. The B3 does have those tubes and tone wheels spinning away, but in the studio you can set up whatever sound you want with the modeled instruments. But for live, maybe more difficult. Have both. The instrument and the clone then choose depending on setting and need.
Xk5 are the best. Incredible engineering.
Hey guys Whats the small keys on the background behind his head above the Fender Rhodes 73?
Pau Cosmos that’s a 1950’s Gibson Clavioline
Andy is spot on about a real Leslie versus any electronic simulation including the xk-5's own on board Leslie. The real Leslie sounds better: richer, fuller, deeper. When I bought my xk-5 I also bought a Leslie 3300 to go with it. The 3300 is smaller, lighter, on wheels & WAY louder sporting a 300 watt amp. AND it's a real doppler not electronic hocus-pocus.
Nice demo. The XK5 is a reasonable compromise especially for gigging. You still have the Leslie to lug about.
As a former roady. I choose the XK-5!
As a former keyboard player I'd do the same.
who wants lug the original B3 around? Brake your back and get a hernia.....yeah, for the 50 bucks you're gonna get for the gig? Music is a dead end business.
@@BryceDAnderson1952 I made do with a Korg 01/W and Yamaha TX-81Z.
The XK-5 definitely sounds good! I think a big thing for my ear is hearing the warmth of your hands on the B-3 vs. the plinky/empty sound on the XK-5 keys. Great video. Love these sounds
b3 is way beter.............XK5 IS TO DECEIVE FOOLS, unique advantage is portable..........aparently, (no paing atention) they seems equal or litle diference, mainly at first sight............BUT SOLID STATE NEVER HAVE THE WEIGHT OF A TUBED. (weight, life, size). xk5 is the same scam of solid state amps
Cool
It's all about the Leslie! both tone generators do approximately the same thing.
The biggest difference is the tone generators of the B3 also are a habitat for spiders, bugs, mice and dust bunnies. Chips just don't provide that kind of shelter for vermin.
That's a remarkable reproduction and given the cost and practicality advantages it's hard to say no but deep down we would all rather have the real thing at home in a room with great acoustics.
Que maravilha!
Love the look of the xk
Commenter below already mentioned it, but it seems like a poor comparison given you're running through the B3 pre-amp on both. Isn't the pre-amp on the B3 a significant part in it's tone characteristics?
Good job! Smart idea to route through the tube amp. This way you are really just making a comparisment of the actual tone before the amplification. In a blind test my guess is no one is able to hear the difference. Especially because no two b3’s sound exactly alike.
What kind of amp would you play your XK-5 through if you didn't happen to have a handy B3's amp to play through?
Bob Aldo:
~ Running a Hammond XK5 through a Center Point Stereo "Spacestation" amp will help give you that 3-dimensional effect of using a real Leslie cabinet. It uses audio "spatial vortex technology" to create a stereo field from a _single_ speaker cabinet. (Please check-out the "links" at the end of this comment.) However, if you also play an organ bass peddle-keyboard along with the organ, or if you just want a lot of bottom-end to your sound, you'd probably want to use a sub-woofer with that Spacestation:
~ UA-cam video explaining Spacestion design: ua-cam.com/video/EpmDm9jq-IM/v-deo.html
~ Center Point Stereo website: aspenpittmandesigns.com/spacestation-v3/
I played mine through a Leslie 3300 on tour. It does not sound like my 122 side by side in the studio- it lacks that warm creamy overdrive. But onstage with a 15-piece band it rocks. In the video I announced I would be playing a real B-3 /122 on the next leg of the Disciples of Soul tour. After numerous breakdowns on the road, for the next leg I used the XK5 in double manual form (“A3”) with a 3300. I was able to go from clean to dirty without wild volume changes. The subtle differences from a 122 were not audible onstage.
B-3 has more of a growl
The Leslie can smooth things over to where the tone is more "organic" type of thing. The B-3 sounds great just on it's own - no so the case with any sim. The test is really - how good can a 122 make a B-3/CX-3/XK-5 sound!
why did i ever sell my 59 B-3.moved only twice in its life.the action was so perfect and quiet and fast,nothing like the one in the movie.Maybe i can buy it back
At least we can dream....
Thanks a bunch! I've been using a NI B4D for 12 years & after that LogicPro X. I'm happy to have the NI B4D Bundle Midi Driver Hardware to be able to some realtime drawbaring! Usually I use my Ensonig TS-10 as the organ keyboard.
B3 sounds more raw, sharper, clearer. The emulator sounds subtley dull.
My go to setting is 16.8.4,2/23
Thanks for this review!
I’m turning 65 and have owned & travelled with several Hammonds and Leslie stacks. I compared my DX7 B3 patch just like you did here, running it thru the B’s preamp & to the Leslie’s. Yamaha published my B3 patch in their DX magazine. Trick was rolling off the amplitude of each drawbar as you played up the keyboard. (Takes 2 DX7’s to simulate all 9 drawbars of course)
I also like to breakout an oscilloscope and compare each drawbar’s waveform. On a tonewheel each tone looks like a sinewave with some wiggle, obviously from the mechanical tone and wheels moving around a little bit. I don’t see that on a lot of B3 clones.
(Hands down...there ain’t nothing like a real Leslie! Or two!)
You can very closely simulate; but not truly emulate....
They sound pretty close...the problem with your test is that you put both trough the Hammond Pre and the Leslie...in a real situation you wouldn`t do that...you would go straight into an Amp or the PA with the XK-5 I guess...that`s the way they should be compared...nobody would do this set up since it makes no sense...but its impresive close
That's not necessarily true. Maybe I'm nuts and I want to carry a 400 lb b3 around as a gigantic preamp? I could put it in my Felix the Cat magical suitcase.
There's no rules...feel free ;-)
What this does prove is the source of the signal is more or less identical. Takes the variability out of it. I don't disagree with your assertion of a different amp setup in a gig environment. But this is the correct approach to do a comparison.
absolutely...as I said impressiv...I`m sure it works live very good...probably even with no Leslie direct into the Amp/PA...The real thing has of course also to do with nostalgia...I like Hammonds a lot...but of course it brings a lot of issues with it if you're on tour
They're not even close in sound. The real one has fire and depth.