[analogorgans] Re: Rodgers analog sound
- From: "Brad" <bstarcevich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <analogorgans@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 10:50:22 -0500
I know that one of the reasons I like the Rodgers analogs
so much is the simple, yet elegant design. I am not at all
intimidated by the electronics of my 330E. It really is an
organ that will never be obsolete. It will literally be
"fixable" forever. There are not to many things that have
stood the test of time as well as these great old Rodgers
analog organs.
Best,
Brad
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas W. Nelson" <twn@xxxxxxx>
To: <analogorgans@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 10:19 AM
Subject: [analogorgans] Re: Rodgers analog sound
Jean Moquin wrote:
> The real fatherhood for this reverb hook up belongs to Charlie
>Strack who provided me with all his vast knowledge, experience and
>also...patience....
>
>
I don't have high-end speakers on my 660D (they're various Cambridge
Soundworks models) due to both budget and space constraints, but I'll
definitely confirm that the addition of reverb has made a huge
difference in the sound quality and enjoyment of the organ. I now have
Behringer Virtualizers on all channels, which has allowed me to create a
very realistic soundfield in the rather modest 16'x24' room the organ
lives in.
> Rodgers has published very complete and well conceived technical
>manuals for most of their analog instruments...As far as I am concerned,
the
>tech manual is as important as the machine itself...maybe this is
>instinctive after a whole carrrer in m.e.....
>
>
And for me, an E. E. working as a computer hardware and software
engineer for over 20 yrs, it's very relaxing to be able to work on the
well-documented analog design of my 660 without having to 'think
digital' after doing it all day :-).
-- Tom Nelson
Other related posts:
