From tyrvaine@hytti.uku.fi Fri Jul 06 05:35:25 2001
Subject:Re: : The _Old_ Korg CX-3

--- In CloneWheel@y..., Larry Schurr wrote:
> Gee, I'd hate to be unsupportive ;-0

;-) I'm not sure if I knew the right word for the occation (english
isn't my native tongue u c..) but you CloneWheelers seem to be quite
enthusiastic about the matters (in a good way I guess ;-).

> I've posted this a couple of times, but hey, another time can't
hurt:
>
> The old cx-3 is just that: the old one.
> Absolutely ANY of the Voce gear is better. But they got no black and
> whites.

Just about any of the Voce gear, eh? Old DMI's (or whatever..) too?
Well I don't think just all the Voce hype is worth the sound. I've
played Voce B2: a wee bit static..? and no drawbars (gasp)! It has
some cheesy Wersi and Farfisa sounds though (eww..!). Unfortunately I
haven't had a chance to thest the V5 which seems to be _the_ gear to
many B-3'ers. Has the most warm tone in the bunch of B-3 simulators
or what would you people say?

I've tested Korg CX-3 the new one, that is. Very good, bit too much
high end shrill in some presets, but usually presets are what they
are anyway... Real tonewheeling goes of course all the way down to
the drawbar fiddling. Dunno if I had the more pristine tonewheel set
going on at the moment I was testing it as opposed to the "vintage"
set which is in the Korg CX-3 organ model also. It was just a brief
test in a local music store as there was a line of people waiting
behind me for their round with the new toy (well that was the
impression that I got from peoples' faces at least ;-).

Roland VK-7 was pretty good one too. I was testing these instruments
in different music shops and the amps that were used added to the
color of the sound as well. BTW - The best results I would have got
with my own (same) set of headphones while comparing different
instruments but I didn't have them with me. I don't actually own a
really _good_ set of headphones, so... Comparing with them would have
given more "reliable" results. I've played a WLM organ which is an
old transistor based "B3-clone" manufactured in Finland. Not much
grunge in it so to speak and all too clean, but has an "organic"
sound of it's own.

One conclusion to the "sound" matter is that my opinions (and
everyone's?) really tend to be pretty subjective when it comes to
the "sound" as stated so often here. Of course tonewheeling is hip
just now but there are other sounds as well which serve in another
purposes better... Should we discuss these "other" sounds in an
another forum. This post seems to go out of this threads boundaries
anyway... For the most of my musical taste concerned I'm listening to
the B-3 - sure... But also other types of organs are sometimes an
option - perhaps some "theatre organs" would be just a bit too much
for me...

> Good but not great. As one of the first 'cloners' out there I went
> from a CV with 2 147's to a PAIR of CX-3's and a stereo volume ped.
> Worked great, no regrets. Never took out another Hammond (but still
> own them). Never chased the sound with filtering or flanging or
> harmonic yaddayadda, just straight and the occasional reverb/echo.
> No, wait.. just reverb.

Just about right.. Well the basic sound just has to have some guts to
it - you can't do wonders with a "bad" basic tone (wheelwise). You
can however spoil the whole thing by adding a too big set of effects
to it (and if the effects were also shrill digital mush - oh dear..).
I was thinking more of desinging an adaptive(?) filter to the old CX-
3 or EQ'ing it a bit (the propellerhead me ;-). I may know (or I'm
trying to learn anyhow ;-) some handy tricks to improve a lame sound
when it comes to filtering with resonance etc... or then again I just
might be going to make the sound go worse than ever - who knows, I
haven't thought all that far yet.. ;-)

But of course there is so much to the basic sound that simply can't
be brought to the old CX-3 sound. Good tonewheel sound, tonewheel
bleeding/crosstalk? Nope. Just "clean" old CX-3ish sound. Wether you
or I might like or dislike it depends on different occations I guess.
You may wonder why I ever think of an old CX-3 when there are far
better clonewheels around. Well it's the same story over again. I
just happen to have a broken CX-3 nearby which I could buy for about
$130 (tone IC would add some $50 to the costs I guess - for what that
would be worth). Keyboard is all too weak (synth type, springboard
keys, augh..) but I thought of building a MIDI controller unit out of
it as I tend to be more of a DIY'er also... ;-) Is it worth it? Doubt
it - but the price is a discussable matter anyhow...

> There was a guy in Austin that sold a daughterboard device that was
> the equivalent of the main t/g ic but I haven't seen his ads lately
> so he's either done or can't justify the ad -- look in some OLD Keyb
> mags. Also, some of the op amps are proprietary and are difficult
> to obtain direct replacement.
>
> If it ain't working perfectly, keep your money tightly clenched.

I've been posting too many messages about the old CX-3 here already
and been trying to find information about it in internet... Too much
work - for nothing? ;-P I think I'll still consider the wreck to be
one possible option for the rig (more importantly the price would
have to be discussed again with the guy who is selling that CX-3 ;-).
I'm having a digital (gig)piano also which would make a good lower
manual for chords but alas - you can't do that with old CX-3. The new
CX-3 is an other case of study alltogether. Good tonewheel discussing
here - let's keep it moving.. ;-)

- Mika Tyrväinen