Viscount vs. other Hammonds Clones.

[Jazzer]

Since Joey Defrancesco has endorsed the Viscount Legend organs and his opinions seems to overrides everyone elses. And because of this I was tempted to buy one. However, judging from YouTube post, most clones sound pretty much the same. I was wondering which one is really is the best? I've tried the Hammond and the Nord CD and the Crumar Mojo under less than ideal conditions and with the exception of the feel of the actions, the sound was pretty much the same. I have yet to test the Viscounts. What is your opinion, which is the best?

[Momboc]

You might get more opinions on the Clonewheel Organ Group facebook page.

[tiredoldgeezer]

"really the best"??
Geez, that's never been answered for a Hammond, let along a Hammond clone.

But consider this: the sound is done. It's there. The clones are more pure than a Hammond OR they can introduce more artifacts than a Hammond, whatever you want.

What is typically weak is the downstream factors. That is, the tonewheel sounds are done. That waveform modeling is complete. But the tube pre-amp? Well... not even the guitarists can agree on that. And the tube power amp? You'll get no consensus there, either. Yet, when sizing up Hammond sounds, that's exactly what most people are hearing. The "grind", etc.

In fact, I have an original version Voce V3 - rackmount clone - that has an 11pin Leslie connector built into the back. They since deleted that feature, of course. But as we all knew, even back then, the amplification really mattered. It matters a lot!

Even with a clone running into a hot tube head (Emerson/Lord style), you could sound "better" than a genuine Hammond with no mods - if that's the sound you're after.

The actions are almost moot. 80 year old consoles are gonna have actions all over the place, depending on upkeep, springs, and felts. Even the nice, new 50 year old consoles are gonna be all over the map. So what's a clone to do? Make it 'perfect' and ideal? or crappy and authentic?

To me it's amusing. A player will purchase a(nother) Hammond with a litany of problems and love it like a puppy; but buy a clone with one glitch and be ready to kick it to the curb.

They're all in pretty good shape, these days. Pick your features; pick your pricetag; you're not gonna get burnt that i've seen in a long time.

[Goff]

The Hammond XK5 has added the key stack (virtual multi-contacts)
although not as complete as the real 9-stack (only 3 contacts) but more affordable than buying a $20k Hammond digital B3. But at $5k how many will avail for the XK5?

All the clones previous to the XK5 do not have the keystack system which is what a B3 is.

The sound of clones although close, is not the same as a B3 out of moving tonewheels.

[Papus]

I recently engineered a recording session for a band, they brought their own XK3 to run through my 122-V.
After running a few songs, their player decided he preferred the grit and growl of my heavily modified T202, and only used his XK3 for left hand bass.
This also worked out better from a recording perspective as I was able to take a direct line out of the XK3 for isolated bass separate from the T202.
Some may say it is sacrilege to prefer a humble solid-state genuine tonewheel spinet over a rather good full-size Hammond clone, but the proof is in the performance and the recording.
There's a random animalistic quality in the old tonewheel Hammonds, even the much-maligned T-series.

I do agree with the other comments regarding amplification being King.
Would you rather have a real tonewheel Hammond played through a cheap solid-state non-rotary keyboard amplifier, or a modern clonewheel running through a real 145?
How about a modern clonewheel running through a Mini Vent II?
Personally, I think I'd prefer a clonewheel running through a real 145 than a badly amplified tonewheel Hammond.

[Goff]

I use a Roland VK8M through a Leslie 222 powered by a Mackie M800 power amp.

Rarely do I use a real B3 for studio use unless it warrants it.

As backing tracks, and if you know how to pull bars, it's good enough for basic tracks. Since the clone can be connected in more ways than a B3 you get more options on tone control.

The 222 is in an isolation cabinet with mics ready to go and everything is hooked to the patchbay.

It's just patchwork, no heavy lifting.

Amplification is important. The VK8M goes through a Millennia STT, to the Mackie power amp, to the 222 and the mic pres are Neves.

One of these days when I get the buzz out of this will want to hook it up to the VK8M


EICO HF-85


If the VK8M wasn't around I would've opted for a Voce bar module.

I have yet to test the Viscounts.

Then that is what you should do. Only you can tell what you like. It's subjective and asking others is not really an acid test as everyone has different concepts about an instrument that appeals to them.

[jbjorge]

I've had a chance to play almost all of them, and they all sound pretty convincing played through the right speaker system. To me, where the Viscount shines above any of the others is the feel, fit, and finish. It feels like a quality instrument. I had an Hammond SK2 for a few years with a Leslie 3300. While it sounded great, I never felt like I was playing a quality instrument. To put it bluntly, it felt cheap. The Hammond B3 portable had a nice fit and finish, but I think the Viscount is even better. Good luck!

Johnny B.

Hammond B3 with Trek II Reverb, Trek II String Bass, 122 Leslie, and Hammond PR-40
Korg Kronos II with CPS SpaceStation V3

[delaware dave]

I have played them all. Let's break it down. My opinion of course..... Keybed, the Mojo has the best feeling keybed of all the clones. Best meaning closest to a real B3. The Viscount feels especially stiff. If keybed feel isnt that important ignore this comment. Tone, they all sound pretty close, not exact, but close enough. The Viscount models three different organs however all three sound pretty much the same. The Mojo offers 20 different modeled organs, many which also sound the same. The Mojo's biggest advantage is the details, i.e. the percussion, C/V (best I've heard on any clone). leslie sims are about the same. Both sound great through a tube leslie. The Viscount's layout is authentic to a real B3. No need to study, everything is where it is supposed to be. Both are reasonably priced. The XK5 has a key contact system (three contacts as opposed to the B3's 9 contacts). The partials heard during a slight key depression is very cool and the XK5 through a tube leslie is pretty much indistinguishable from a real B3. It's layout is also authentic. The only two issues I have with the XK5 are the internal leslie (good but not great) and the price point. If money is no object then the full monty XK5 is the way to go. However for 1/3 the price you can purchase either a dual manual Mojo or a Viscount. If the layout is important then the Viscount may be right for you; if sound details are important you might want to look at the Mojo. The Nord C2D also sounds good but not up to the sound quality detail of the Mojo/Viscount. My two cents.....

[enor]

The Viscount in fact has 6 onboard organ models, of which 3 are in non-modifiable memory, and 3 are user-replaceable with models from their online library. A total of 11 models are available, plus another 3 if you purchase the DeFrancesco signature model. I certainly don't agree "they all sound the same".

[tiredoldgeezer]

Luckily, no one ever said, "they all sound the same", so you're not disagreeing with anyone that you might be quoting.

But they all sound like a Hammond. Not exactly like a specific Hammond, but then, neither does any other Hammond.

[delaware dave]

Enor, I never quoted that they "all sound the same". Reread the quote. Dont re-quote someone and leave out words.

[enor]

Sorry. Should have said "pretty much the same". Don't agree with that either though.

[tiredoldgeezer]

My, my ... still awfully disagreeable :-> (kidding!)

But yes, they have certain distinctions. Yes, the Voce V5 sounds different from the XK5, and the Crumar T-2 sound different from the Mojo. Sure, we can debate that till the cows come home. I agree, it can be detected. No argument.

But then, there's this.....

Rarely do I use a real B3 for studio use unless it warrants it.

This, to me, speaks volumes! But it's true. Many of us (myself included) have done exactly the same.

That time you're gonna put your organ work into the permanent record and you DON'T choose an absolutely beautifully authentic Hammond? What gives?
Less babysitting; less hassle; better blend; it's more manageable; there's a dozen reasons. But we all have been known to do it. No indictment.

So when we get into the cork-sniffing discussions, I'm always prompted to think about the guitarists. Some are crazy like that. Gotta have the PRS or the Strat or the 1959 Tobacco Strat because the white Strat isn't the right guitar. You know the guys and have played with them. And then they pump it through 6 or 7 pedals and a red hot tube amp that, while sounding 'good', sounds nothing like the input signal. When it comes out, it sounds like a guitar and that's really all.

Or the drummer that goes through the same gyrations about shells and mounts, then spends 20 minutes dialing in enough compression to get them to sit in the mix. They come out sounding like drums and that's really all.

And it only gets worse in our current .mp3 world. So when it comes down to what you actually hear, solo or with the band, recorded or live, the results are wildly variable except if you ask anyone listening, they'll say "B3". What the software group at Kurzweil did, or what the software group at Hammond did, may differ from what the software group at Emu or Viscount did. But they all came out as organ products and mostly good ones at that.

What matters are the notes. Anyone can buy the best hardware; few can make the best notes, certainly not me.

So IMO, they ALL sound like a B3 in that they don't sound like a Wurli or a String Machine. So in that respect, I'll side with 'pretty much the same'.

[MrHill]

Like so many others I love the sound of a real Hammond B3 , M3 , A100 and M112 , but with the clones its apples and oranges with all the new tech nobody has over taken the market. I myself has made a comment to myself heh heh to build my own clone so I can get what I want in a clone. I think that the clones are pretty pricey for what you get because what one has the other lacks and we are still not happy because of that lack and every time you lookup they have a download update but is never what you want so its more of about what you expect it to do and not so much what you want it to do. I know I have said want a lot here but that is really what its about. I love my M3 if I could get close to that sound with the added perc sound of the B3 I will be happy and this is the goal to be happy.

[Papus]

The one big element missing from the clones is the feeling that you're sitting at the helm of a massive, powerful, potentially dangerous machine, full of whirring mechanical parts and hot glowing tubes.

A real Hammond feels like you're at the command of a huge oversized mining dump truck, or a massive freight train, especially when that Hammond growl kicks in.
I don't get that sensation sitting at a plastic clone.

I've sometimes thought there must be a market for empty wooden console shells designed to house clones, and easily broken down into flat panels for gigging.
I‘d take an empty C3 shell any day.

[tiredoldgeezer]

I‘d take an empty C3 shell any day.

As luck would have it, I did such a thing with a CV shell.

People discard the CV pretty easily. Makes for a dynamite cabinet for any clone/keyboard project.

[Wes]

Goff - the XK5 only has three contacts per key. Only the new B3, B3-P have one contact per drawbar like a vintage organ.

[Goff]

Goff - the XK5 only has three contacts per key. Only the new B3, B3-P have one contact per drawbar like a vintage organ.

Hi Wes, yeah I think I tried to imply that without being too clear.

XK5: 3 Physical Contacts, 9 Assignable Virtual Contacts
Adjustable Attack, Release, Decay

Maybe because the Hamco site isn't clear itself. It doesn't even explain the stack system for the digital B3 that I could find.
Just says " Keying Method-Direct Analog Keying."

There used to be a photo of the virtual multi contacts (VMC) but I can't find it anymore.

You figure 3 contacts is a lot better than no contacts as in all the other clones that have been around for the last 50 years starting with the Crumar.

Does anyone know if the Porta-B (L100) had keystack?