Yamaha EL90 vs AR100

[RogerM]

I have had a Yamaha EL90 from new and, as you may have seen in another thread, I still rate it highly. However I am thinking of a change. I have picked Forum members’ brains about the Roland Atelier AT-800/900 but I have now ruled this out on size grounds; it’s a big piece of furniture to which my wife takes exception!

So I am looking now at the Yamaha AR100 which I was told offers all the good bits of the EL90 with vastly uprated rhythm and accompaniment sections. It’s also considerably cheaper than the Atelier. In a thread of about two years ago andyg highly rated the organ voices but was less enthusiastic about the orchestral sounds, I think even putting the EL90 ahead in that department. I’m thinking alandlees might have thoughts about that as he clearly puts the AR100 on a pedestal. I would appreciate it if those two gentlemen in particular would please expand upon these views.

Orchestral and instrumental sounds are probably more important to me than organ sounds. Might I have to chose between the comprehensive rhythm section of the AR100 and the possibly better orchestral voices of my EL90. Perhaps I should keep the EL.

Views from all quarters will be very much appreciated.

[andyg]

I'll stand by what I said back then. The AR100 wipes the floor with the EL series when it comes to organ sounds, period! Its rhythms are a bit more advanced, not sure about 'vastly'. But its orchestral sounds are not as high quality as the EL90, IMHO. They're good, though, and I think that many people would be happy with them. But if you look at ensemble strings, for example, I keep on coming back to the same one, 'Popular Strings' over and over, as it's the only one I'd rate as good. I played the AR100 in concert many times and it did everything I wanted, but with a few compromises. After Yamaha pulled out of the UK organ market in 2003, I switched to an EL70 or EL90. I wasn't so happy, primarily because of the organ sounds.

Given the choice of EL90 and AR100, I'd go AR100 but if orchestral voices are more important to you, then maybe look for an EL900, which is a jump forward in that respect. But they're rare on the used market and command a premium because of that.

What you really need to do is get the AT800 and trade in the better half! :D

[GrowlingDog]

Slightly Off Topic, but this is available and it's quite close to you. Looks like a bargain to me, sadly I don't have the funds for it at the moment.

https://www.gumtree.com/p/music-orga...nch/1293411560

I can't help you with the organs you are referring to, but I keep looking longingly at the Yamaha AR100.

[RogerM]

If I got an AT-800 my better half would trade me in. I have to agree with her - it is a big instrument and the heavy wooden cabinet would look out of place in the room which houses the organ. The AR100 is a better bet because it is smaller but the EL90 wins hands down when it comes to looks and suitability for the room.

I’ve listened to the AR but need to play it more to assess the quality of its voices. I’m so used to the EL I have to determine whether the AR orchestral voices are of lesser quality or just different. I suspect that like many of us I compare one organ with another rather than with the real thing. Do you think Yamaha used an inferior sampling technique with the AR or perhaps just sampled different instruments from the EL? I can’t see that they would deliberately downgrade the technique from the EL which preceded the AR by six years. How could that be a good move?

If I didn’t already have an instrument I would go for the AR. What I have decide is whether it’s worth changing the EL which must be nearly 30 years old for something that is only a few years newer. I have an extensive collection of Yamaha and third party software for the EL which really does get the most out of it. That would become redundant - what a waste. And an hour or two on the AR will not be enough to determine whether the built-in styles and registrations can match it. What I really want is both instruments side by side for a couple of weeks!

I don’t believe the EL900 offers the improved rhythm/accompaniment sections of the AR which I find attractive, so that’s not in the frame.

Any further thoughts?

[RogerM]

A Bohm. Now there’s a thought. Apart from DirkJan Ranzijn’s protagonism I know nothing about them. I could watch/listen to him all day. I went to a Mark Shakespeare concert years ago when he was playing Bohm. Unfortunately the instrument ‘blew up’ halfway into the first piece and it was not repairable on site, so I’ve never heard one live apart from a couple minutes.

You will see from my previous post that size poses a serious domestic issue, so I don’t think external speakers would earn me any Brownie points! Thanks for the thought.

[abacus]

External speakers are always better than inbuilt, however conventional speakers to tend to stand out in the room, so why not take a look at Sub/Sat systems, as they will give you a much better sound than internal speakers and take up little room, which should keep the other half happy and you as well.

Bohm are nice instruments and can be upgraded (At a cost) to the latest specs, however their operation is a lot different to the EL/AR so may or may not suit you, so make sure you try before you buy. (Moving from something familiar to something new will always be difficult at first, but if you stay with the same manufacture for ease of use you miss all the possibilities that other manufactures give, which may or may not suit you better)

Bill

[seamaster]

If I got an AT-800 my better half would trade me in. I have to agree with her - it is a big instrument and the heavy wooden cabinet would look out of place in the room which houses the organ.

What about an AT-100. Decent spec, great orchestral sounds, pukka drawbars — and all in a smaller, more contemporary cabinet.

[alandlees]

You’re in a quandary here I can tell! I know, I’ve been there. The AR, in my opinion, is as Andy has said, streets ahead of the EL on organ sounds, much better on rhythms (in particular more “orchestrated styles”) and in my opinion very close on orchestral. It is, however different to the EL in so far as it was designed more for a home audience so compromises on key quality and things like pedal sensitivity. The reason I suggested it in the first place is because I think you are so closely matched to the EL that a Roland or other make would take you too far out of your comfort zone. It has been said before that the ONLY way you can really judge is to go and play and hear one in person. Another suggestion I would make is join www.ar-group.org and listen to some of their performances. I did this and if you get an AR you can download their registrations to play yourself. When I first had my AR I struggled but after joining this group it opened up the possibilities for me. Unfortunately I think an organ is always a compromise, some are better than others at different things. For me, after owning Roland, wersi, Lowrey, technics, and Yamaha, the AR turned out to be the best compromise for me. Maybe if your EL is still good, it’s your best compromise!

[ken horton]

I've had both and it is difficult to choose, but if you want a good all round performance the AR 100 is the best bet in my opinion, it can't match the flute footages of the EL range has which are so distinctive and is more tweakable if you want to mutate the voice envelope , but the AR can produce better theatre a sounds than the E L But I still used an expander / keyboard for styles for the AR, the AR's styles are better than the EL but not that much better. #An even better choice (again in my opinion as I had an Orla GT 9000 which is almost the same) is the Orla Grand Theatre with better styles and a very good range of organ voices.
A different concept in operation but once mastered I found them much better to use than the Yamahas. Ken

[andyg]

IIRC it has more flute footages than the EL90, and of course it has the different types of flute - theatre, 'Hammond-ish' and classical as well as the standard Yamaha sound. And the 'touch drawbars' are much easier to use than the on screen ones. And you can play mix and match with the tremulants, drawbars plus theatre tremulant speeded up is a heck of a good Leslie sim, but you don't have the wind up/down effect, just trem and chorus. It was my 'go to' trem setting for organ sounds.

The AR group has copies of all the registration disks that I used in concert.

[RogerM]

Thank you, gentlemen, for your valued input. After taking everything into consideration I have decided to go for an AR100 with pristine gold lettering so hopefully I have bagged a good one. It is a compromise but I think it will give me most of what I want (sob, no touch sensitive pedals) and I take delivery next week.

Next, to register with the AR-Group.

Thanks again.

[slewis72]

Hi, I've just joined the group and have a question on the el90 vs ar100, erm, question...

I used to have an el90, then sold it and got an ar100, but I'm thinking about getting either an ar or el for our church. Obviously the organ presets on the ar are fantastic, and the customisation of those organ voices to vary the tone but I've heard John Beesleys excellent organ registrations for the el. Since people seem to think the orchestral sounds are better on the el, do people think this would be better as an overall instrument?

[RogerM]

Having had both, you will know the relative qualities of the EL and AR Electones. The AR is so much easier to drive than the EL and I would think is a better bet for church use, especially if it is likely to be played by more than one organist - not that I have any relevant experience. I've had my AR for a year now and haven't yet formed an opinion as to the merits of its orchestral voices when compared with the EL. Maybe I never will as I don't really have a musical ear. I can't say I have found anything wrong with the AR sounds so far. How relevant are the orchestral voices to your church music?

You have more voice editing facilities on the EL which I suspect is why there was far more Yamaha and third party software for it than the AR. This produces sounds which cannot be replicated on the AR. But the latter does offer a good range of presets.

I do wonder whether either EL or AR should be first choice for church use but I'm not qualified to go down that road. On balance I rate the AR as the overall better instrument, but probably not by a great margin.

[seamaster]

Welcome to the forum, slewis72.

[RogerM]

Reprimand accepted, seamaster X-(

Welcome to the forum, slewis72.