From den121961@yahoo.com Mon Oct 28 20:20:46 2013
Subject:Re: Question about Roland VR-09 & Hammond SK1

Craig, it's funny but telling. Whenever an unknown clone stood out to me that I really liked listening to a band live I'd always ask what it was, or go up and check. It always ended up being a CX3. Yet I knew a lot of guys that would foam at the mouth when you brought them up they hated them so much. And whenever I heard nords, there's just something about them I don't like, and it stands out to me. I can easily listen to a nord played by someone else (and have bought CD's of them), but I would never get one. It comes down to the fact that we all like our organs differently, and whatever the perfect organ is in our mind, we're going to try and get that out of anything we sit at. The one that does it best (if we are tweakers) or the one that has the closest factory preset if we're not a tweaker will be the one we end up liking.
As far as the other things go, you've made it obvious you need a pitch bend, as well as some specific layering things. Synth is also important to you. There were some specifics I needed when I was shopping (the VR wasn't out or visible anyway yet). The SK did what I needed it to do the best, and yes there were shortcomings. Seperate outs for organ and extra sounds were a biggie. Wurly was important but not as important. I'd say the SK's wurly was the biggest hit I took. Synth and strings weren't even a consideration, I just never use them. Give me a clav, wurly or rhodes and a great organ that sounds like I like it to sound with controls where I can get to them in a hurry, and I'm happy.
As you know, I just picked up a VR for a steal (under 5 bills). I'm using it as a backup (meaning it sits in the car all lonely) for the blues and R&B stuff. However, it goes out for the polka duo gig because those features that were so important for my main gigs aren't important for that. The VR has features that actually work better for the polka thing. Since I'm using both I have been in a good position to really get to know them, and compare. I like them both, they're both different, but both do a good organ, to my ear they're both a bunch of steps forward from the CX I used to use (and yes, I did a three way comparison through the vent), and if I found either of them in backline at a gig I had to do I'd have a good night.
Somehow we all end up taking sides for our specific clone on this forum and feeling we have to attack the others. Not sure why this is, I have a feeling it's because we as musicians have such a deep connection with our instruments. You have ford vs chevy guys, you have Fender vs Marshal guys, so I guess we ain't alone. But as an owner of both of these, they're both great keys, and when I take one out over the other it isn't because the other one is junk, it's merely because the one does more of what I need it to do in that particular case than the other one. I think if we applied that to each other we'd realize we all need different things and when we pick one it doesn't mean the other one is junkier.
But hey, what can you expect from a bunch of guys obsessed with their organs!



---In CloneWheel@yahoogroups.com, wrote:

Ken that's funny.. !!

I'm on the side with the "don't like the EV's" crowd and to be honest it's not that I hate the sounds, I'm just disappointed that they were better and more comprehensive, especially in a keyboard costing $2000.. The SK1 doesn't even come with nice warm strings on board.... WTF?? They didn't even exist in the downloadable library when I bought mine (not sure if they do even now). I was also disappointed with the fact that you couldn't split/layer two non-organ sounds. When I purchased the SK1 I wanted a back up drawbar organ, and an all-in-one that I could use for small gigs.. but unfortunately the SK1 doesn't work for me..

My VR-09 does a lot of things the SK1 can't do, and works very well as backup organ for my Mojo and my Kronos, and as an all-in-one for small gigs with my classic rock band..

Regards,
Craig MacDonald