Tone list vs Hex Layer Tone list

[Bellyman]

I have been using my 560M for some local gigs and there are a lot of things I like about it. It's lightweight, and the piano sound I have loaded onto it is really great. The string sounds are kinda mediocre but they pair nicely with the piano.

 

One or two of the songs we are doing would go really well with a Hammond B3 type sound. Not happening. There is one organ sound that I think I may be able to get to work. So I had been messing with the Hex Layer menus thinking I might be able to create something.

 

So as I was diving into the Hex Layer menu, looking at available voices, I do not find any of the voices I've added, such as that particular piano that I added. There are lots of voices, but I didn't see the ones that were "user added". Am I missing something? Or are the two menus totally isolated? Or did I not add the user voices correctly?

 

 I know there are limits to what the 590 can do. But it's something I wondered about. It's such an easy keyboard to carry, set up and take down, especially for us ol' folks who don't like the heavy lifting of the old keyboards like the Roland Fantom X8... love that one, but my back hates moving it.

 

Thanks for any insights!

[Brad Saucier]

Hex layer is the synth engine in the PX-550.  Whenever you're creating a hex layer tone and choosing sounds for each layer, those are called "waves".   These are not to be confused with preset tones.  Those waves are raw samples stored in ROM which make up the normal preset tones, except for drum kits.  You can turn on "initialize by wave" to load suggested parameters for that wave.  The loaded settings will be similar to the preset tone which uses that wave data.   You can turn off "initialize by wave" to load the wave data without suggested settings for a pure start-from-scratch experience.   

 

With the PX-560, it is not possible add new wave data, so there are no "user" waves to select in a hex layer tone.  All user tones are made with factory loaded wave data.  

[Jokeyman123]

And there are more options for editing each part of a hex layer than are available when you are editing a non-hex layer tone. Individual wav samples (the raw samples that Brad described) can only be accessed through the hex layers when creating a new user tone, not the non-hex layer tones. A little odd, but that is the biggest difference I have found. So for example, you can create a hex layer organ tone, with different organ raw waves for each layer of the new hex layer organ. Unfortunately you will not be able to control each layer's volume to simulate a drawbar organ remotely through midi with another controller, there is no sysex or midi implementation to access those volume layer settings.  You would have to preset each layer's volume as part of your hex layer and save it as is. But you can come up with some pretty interesting organ tones as hex layers, simulating different stops/octaves/wavsamples per layer, setting respective volume layers for each to get simulated drawbar stops. Would take...some work and time. Maybe not what you are after. But considering how many user hex layer tones you can save internally-could have a whole bank of organ variations arranged consecutively-would still be cumbersome to switch from one to another but would give you a bunch of organ variations in the same group of hex layer tones. Not as convenient as having individual separate banks under your fingers, but as close as I could get on the PX560.

 

Many years ago, using simple sine waves at different octaves, my Korg DSS-1 created some very credible Hammond organ tones. took some doing, I'm wondering if that might work with the PX560, which has raw sine waves accessible through a hex layer.

[Bellyman]

Thanks, guys!

 

So far, the gigs have past and I haven't had any use for the B3 sounds as we ran out of time before we got to those songs.

 

The farther I go with this, the more inclined I am to think I'd be better off to expand to a second or third(?) keyboard and / or another sound module or two rather than trying to make the 560 do it all. It's handy, yeah, but there are limits to what's practical.

 

Then again, maybe the band will come up with some more players.  Never know... 

[Jokeyman123]

A few years ago several posters here had a discussion about the merits of aftermarket devices that might better simulate the Hammond B3 sounds and Leslie speaker simulations. several were mentioned, the Neoventilator being one and the Ferrofish B4000+ another. I've opted for the B4000+ because it has full-size drawbars-only one rank-but this device allows 2 keyboards to be input through midi for upper and lower manuals, and is a sound module with settings for splits. Also made like a brick-case is all steel and a bit on the heavy side. I've been playing it the last few weeks and its not bad. I also have a Rotovibe which is a pedal and has many different settings for styles of Leslie, ramp up and and down and setting separate speeds for the bass and horns. The Rotovibe is alot less expensive, really made more for the guitarist but the impedance matches my keyboards pretty well. You will still not have the true variations possible with a bank of drawbars. All of these have been around for awhile, might be worth checking around. The Neoventilator is also pretty expensive (IMO) but has quite a few diehard fans. and i never worked a gig with only one keyboard-in case on died, I'd always have a backup, and easier to play 2 sounds live quickly, and switch. Can always call up one tone on one while playing live on the other one. Plus, usually for my chops-one piano action and one-spring action made life alot easier.

[AlenK]

On 12/4/2022 at 2:06 PM, Jokeyman123 said:

So for example, you can create a hex layer organ tone, with different organ raw waves for each layer of the new hex layer organ. Unfortunately you will not be able to control each layer's volume to simulate a drawbar organ remotely through midi with another controller, there is no sysex or midi implementation to access those volume layer settings. 

 

Late reply and it won't help the OP, but many of the layer settings in a Hex Layer tone are controllable via NRPN commands, as described on page 14 of the PX-560 Midi Implementation document. Layer-specific parameters other than volume are also controllable (e.g., pan position and LFO depth parameters), but none other than volume would be required in this specific application. I suspect this kind of control is provided on all Casio keyboards that support Hex Layer tones, right back to the XW-P1 (although on the XW-P1, there are far less layer-specific parameters that are controllable).

 

However, such control of a Hex Layer tone can only emulate six of nine drawbars, at least for independent control of the overtones. It's the same kind of control you have on the PX-5s using its six built-in sliders. And then there is the issue of the rotary-speaker effect that emulates a typical Leslie. Is that effect better on the PX-560 than it is on the XW-P1 and on the PX-5s (the latter two sounding identical in that regard AFAIK)? I confess that in all the time I have had the PX-560, I have not auditioned that effect to ascertain if its emulation of a real Leslie is better than the one on the XW-P1. If it's not, you would still need an outboard rotary-speaker effects unit (such as a Burn or a Ventilator) to get something more authentic. Seems like the B4000+ would be a better use of that money because it provides everything you need except for keys (assuming its own rotary-speaker effect is up-to-snuff).

 

Speaking of keys, the differences between playing organ on a piano-weighted keyboard, a typical synth keyboard, a Casio synth keyboard (such as on the XW-P1) and the waterfall keyboard on a "proper" B3 clone or a real B3 is something that should be considered. The playing experience improves as you go through that list. (Or so I am told. I have never played a B3 or a B3 clone and it's a stretch to call what I do on any keyboard "playing." 😄)

  

Edited February 7, 2023 by AlenK

[Jokeyman123]

The keys on a Hammond are actually spring-loaded, (I've been lucky to have played a few different Hammonds over the years, including my friend RobEone's modded C, B and M-3's back in the 60's when this was pretty much all we had-very similar to some of the older spring-loaded non-weighted keyboards-most all newer non-weighted keys are now using, like Casio- the back of the key as a makeshift "hinge" which is part of the key. The difference in feel to me is noticeable-the older spring-loaded mechanisms-such as on the original DX-7, the Generalmusics, early Korgs and Rolands, my SY77 and many others-feels a bit more like the Hammond keys, which provided a bit of resistance and a pretty rapid key return due to the springs-which explains how some of the earliest jazz players-Jimmy Smith, "Brother" Jack Mcduff and later Keith Emerson, Joey Defrancesco and others for example-cuold play such rapid passages, and yet without having to wait for a sluggish return to position keyweight. 

 

AlenK, so glad to see you are still here! 

 

I'm thinking-will have to check the Ferrofish midi implementation-to see if it sends NRPNs, which i still have trouble understanding for some reason-my right-brain oriented left-hand non-logical thinking is getting in my way. I know what these do, but have trouble writing the parameter codes and sysex strings, but not for lack of trying.

 

It would be interesting to see if I can send the Ferrofish midi out to change discrete levels for a hex layer but you are right-might be too much trouble for not much return since the Ferrofish now covers that with its built-in tone module. In my older laptops, I also have (or had-have to check my software "archives") 2 very interesting virtual drawbar programs for Windows XP which ran as stand-alone programs-similar to that part of IDES 4.0 which has virtual drawbars, percussion and fast/slow leslie simulations which work amazingly well for my old Casio PX575-and i think also for the MZ-2000 and a few other WK's. But this Casio software is dedicated to those hardware instruments-I never checked to see what is going out the midi path with Midiox but I doubt the Casio virtual drawbar sim can send out NRPN's without some serious decoding/recoding which is beyond me.

 

The Ferrofish by the way-not terribly knocked out by its leslie sim, but it can be more finely tuned and set up for ramp up/down, percussion, its a pretty comprehensive tone module and the drawbars are substantial, physically as hefty as Hammond drawbars. I had to make a case for it so it stays stable under my keys-tried to position it where I'd grab Hammond drawbars, but not quite-without a hacksaw and jaws of life!!!

 

The good-it does midi DIN for the XW and PX560-have yet to see if the XW will respond to the Ferrofish drawbars-so little time so much to do!!!! I think what I miss is that massive psycho-acoustic effect produced by that beautiful resonant wood cabinet-which was not so much a piercing upper register effect-which also could be there-as more as it was a huge, full-sounding blanket which could manage to fill out even a duo or trio-if one had mastery of the pedals for bass. Nothing like it! When the drum motor failed, it was immediately apparent that the bass effect was gone-the rotating drum really spread the bass sound out alot. Boy am I dating myself....

 

And Bellyfish-have you auditioned the hex layer organ tones?  Shows how the hex layers can be used to simulate drawbar variations-there are a few tones that do this although would still need a strong Leslie simulation. 

 

 

[AlenK]

2 hours ago, Jokeyman123 said:

The keys on a Hammond are actually spring-loaded, (I've been lucky to have played a few different Hammonds over the years, including my friend RobEone's modded C, B and M-3's back in the 60's when this was pretty much all we had-very similar to some of the older spring-loaded non-weighted keyboards-most all newer non-weighted keys are now using, like Casio- the back of the key as a makeshift "hinge" which is part of the key. The difference in feel to me is noticeable-the older spring-loaded mechanisms-such as on the original DX-7, the Generalmusics, early Korgs and Rolands, my SY77 and many others-feels a bit more like the Hammond keys, which provided a bit of resistance and a pretty rapid key return due to the springs.

Aren’t most keyboards, other than those on a real piano (and some digital pianos), spring loaded in some way? If not, how does key return happen? 
 

The keys on my XW-P1 have a different feel than the keys on my Roland D-10 immediately above it on my keyboard stand. I wouldn’t say one is better than the other; they’re just different. But two differences between a typical synth keyboard and an organ waterfall keyboard may make a difference when playing organ sounds.
 

First, the edges of the organ’s keys are slightly rounded. Those on the XW have a slight lip, even though the shape of each key is otherwise similar. The keys on my D-10, like most synth keyboards, are even less like organ keys. They have narrow front faces, so are even worse for doing things like palm slides. 

 

The other difference that may affect playing of organ tones is where the trigger point is. On organ keyboards, the key contacts close with only a modest amount of key depression. On a typical synth keyboard, which needs to measure  velocity (not a requirement back in the earliest days of synths), the triggering happens much later during depression of the key. The difference in timing is mere milliseconds but I have read that it affects how responsive the keyboard feels. 
 

Edited February 7, 2023 by AlenK

[Jokeyman123]

if you haven't seen the inside of the XW-P1-if you look for spare keys for the XW-and the CTK's and CTTX's from various parts suppliers-you will see there is no spring mechanism--the flexible plastic tab end of the key is actually the pivot point-which is screwed to the top of the keyframe with strips connecting adjacent keys. And why these keys may feel slightly lighter in response. I've had several of my Casios apart doing my felt mods-and have been able to study these mechanisms. not a bad design, but definitely a different response than a true spring-loaded mechanism. And yes of course since the Hammonds did not need to deal with velocity response the mechanism could be simpler-and faster-almost feels too lightweight after playing many of my other spring action keys.

Edited February 8, 2023 by Jokeyman123

[AlenK]

51 minutes ago, Jokeyman123 said:

if you haven't seen the inside of the XW-P1-if you look for spare keys from various parts suppliers-you will see there is no spring mechanism--the flexible plastic tab end of the key is actually the pivot point-which is screwed to the top of the keyframe with strips connecting adjacent keys. and why these keys may feel slightly lighter in response.

Then the plastic itself is the spring mechanism. In this case it’s not a separate part but the function of a spring is still there. Unless there is some sort of mechanism to emulate a hammer action, which of course you get on most digital pianos, a spring _function_ must be there to return the key to its rest position.