What's new

Acousticsamples releases the B-5 Organ

b5organscreen-600x401.png

The Hammond organs are very complex beasts, full of wires. Until now, the best renditions were synthesis, mainly because of how the organ works which is a set of 91 frequencies that are connected via contactors under each key and which volume is controlled by the drawbars.
Sample based libraries consist of stacking drawbar samples at the same time which works, but causes big problems.
We have found a way to use the 91 frequencies synthesis approach, but using real samples, so you get the best of both worlds, the real recorded organ tone plus the real behavior and we keep access to the versatility of the drawbar controls and the tweakability of synthesis.

Here are the main features of the B-5 Organ.
Sample based synthesis: each of the 91 tones have been sampled, measured and meticulously reproduced, the key contacts, the resistance wires, the foldback, the drawbars, the swell pedal, the percussion, and every button available on the original machine.
Rotary Speaker Simulation: An organ without its rotary speaker isn't an organ. Acousticsamples provided UVI with very detailed measurements and they created an incredible physical model.
Advanced percussion system: the whole percussion system has been recreated and you can customize every aspect of it.
Real key contact modeling: 9 contacts are made one after another under each key and each of them produces a small click, making this the only influence of the velocity and resulting in a different click sound each time you press a key.
All three keyboards: On a real organ, there are 3 keyboards, two of which are almost identical except for the percussion system, and the bass pedals. You can choose to use 3 different MIDI channels, one for each keyboard or you can use the split to have all three on one keyboard.
Presets: There are around 200 drawbar presets that you can load, save, delete or assign to the preset keys (upper and lower), and these include the most used Jazz, Gospel and classical presets.
Organ modifications: Every organ player likes to tweak his instrument, so every modification that organists can do is available here.

Here are the audio demos for the B-5 Organ:
https://SoundCloud.com/acousticsamples/sets/b5-organ

As well as the presentation video:
https://www.YouTube.com/watch?v=DieOAxHSmsw

You can get the B-5 Organ for 99€ / 109$ from the Acousticsamples website.
 

owenave

Active Member
I was raised on B3's and from what I have heard on the demos and read this B-5 organ
sounds great. Has anyone tried this on a MacBookPro to use with a good quality Audio Interface to use live. This is what I would love to have if and when I tour again. While we had back-line provide Hammond's for us in past, some were pretty beat up or die during the show. @AcousticsampleS do you know of anyone has done this on a Dual core Mac Book Pro?
 

Raindog

Senior Member
I was raised on B3's and from what I have heard on the demos and read this B-5 organ
sounds great. Has anyone tried this on a MacBookPro to use with a good quality Audio Interface to use live. This is what I would love to have if and when I tour again. While we had back-line provide Hammond's for us in past, some were pretty beat up or die during the show. @AcousticsampleS do you know of anyone has done this on a Dual core Mac Book Pro?

I have a quad core Macbook (17 " 2011 MacBook Pro) and use the B5 without any problems (firewire Interface from TC Electronic). It´s pretty easy on cpu and doesn´t need a lot of RAM as only the tone generators are sample based, all the rest ist modelled.
Best regards
Raindog
 

owenave

Active Member
I have a quad core Macbook (17 " 2011 MacBook Pro) and use the B5 without any problems (firewire Interface from TC Electronic). It´s pretty easy on cpu and doesn´t need a lot of RAM as only the tone generators are sample based, all the rest ist modelled.
Best regards
Raindog
Thanks @Raindog I am going to try it on my 2010 Mac Book Pro 2.4 ghz. 8 gb of ram. I use firewires Motu 896 MkIII H... But I have a cheaper firewire Stereo Interface. I think an early ProSonus.
 

Baron Greuner

Senior Member
I was raised on B3's and from what I have heard on the demos and read this B-5 organ
sounds great.

I think we're old Hammond dogs of war Larry.

It does sound very good. The demos are interesting and a bit different. Some jazzy and some show off key click etc pretty well. It's good a one. Definitely think that anyone playing live could use this. Lot lighter than a B3.
Particularly like Larry Goldings demos.
 

re-peat

Senior Member
I'm having a tiny problem with it in that, no matter how I tweak the parameters, I can't get a good Jimmy Smith sound out of the B5. That warm, bluesy, (s)creamy organ sound as can be heard on Smith's Verve and Blue Note recordings. It's the sort of timbre — at least, a fairly decent approximation of it — which the GS VB3 does quite well (and easily), but which I haven't been able to simulate with the B5. Not even close, in fact.

Here a little comparison which illustrates those differences. Six short bits, first played with the B5, followed by the VB3. Very similar drawbar-settings, and yet an entirely different sound. I might be wrong, but to my ears, there's some body and weight missing in the lower drawbars of the B5 and it also doesn't seem to have that brooding, focused energy in its timbre which the VB3 suggests so convincingly.

Still, I posted the same remark on Gearslutz and just about everyone who replied in that thread, felt that the B5 sounded the better of two (something with which I completely disagree — at least, for this specific type of Jimmy Smith timbre), so there you are.

It's, to my ears, the only shortcoming in an otherwise sensational Hammond emulation though. Terrific instrument this.

_
 

DJorge

New Member
Do you need to use a Dongle or just Computer version of iLok?
You can choose either option at the time of purchase. I chose the computer version and downloaded that ilok license. It was my first time dealing with iLok, so from initial registration to jamming on my DAW took me 30 minutes when it probably should've took 10
 
Last edited:

Raindog

Senior Member
so far which
I'm having a tiny problem with it in that, no matter how I tweak the parameters, I can't get a good Jimmy Smith sound out of the B5. That warm, bluesy, (s)creamy organ sound as can be heard on Smith's Verve and Blue Note recordings. It's the sort of timbre — at least, a fairly decent approximation of it — which the GS VB3 does quite well (and easily), but which I haven't been able to simulate with the B5. Not even close, in fact.

Here a little comparison which illustrates those differences. Six short bits, first played with the B5, followed by the VB3. Very similar drawbar-settings, and yet an entirely different sound. I might be wrong, but to my ears, there's some body and weight missing in the lower drawbars of the B5 and it also doesn't seem to have that brooding, focused energy in its timbre which the VB3 suggests so convincingly.

Still, I posted the same remark on Gearslutz and just about everyone who replied in that thread, felt that the B5 sounded the better of two (something with which I completely disagree — at least, for this specific type of Jimmy Smith timbre), so there you are.

It's, to my ears, the only shortcoming in an otherwise sensational Hammond emulation though. Terrific instrument this.

_

Maybe I´m completely wrong but have you activated the scanner vibrato when playing the B5? Other than the VB3 many parameters (i.e. the scanner vibrato) are not stored in the presets with the B5. If I didn´t get the examples wrong it sounded like the VB3 examples have the chorus (c3?) activated while the B5 examples haven´t. I would wonder if a musician of your class would do this by mistake but you never know.

I´m a big fan of the VB3 but I definitely prefer the B5 soundwise. It sounds and plays (almost) like the real thing. The overdrive is really good. I was even thinking to buy a waterfall equipped Keyboard to make full use of this emulation. I simply haven´t bought anything which I regretted so far from Acousticsamples. Arno does most things right imo.

Best regards
Raindog
 
Last edited:

re-peat

Senior Member
Thanks for the suggestion, Raindog, but it’s not the scanner vibrato. In fact, on or off, the scanner vibrato hardly seems to make any difference, at least not for the timbre which I’m looking for.

The difference between the B5 and the VB3 is happening in (a) the attacks (b) the overall tonal balance, and (c) the impact and energy (which the VB3 has a lot of, and the B5 very little) of each note.

Made another example (very quick, very rough, very sorry): five petite bits given to both instruments (again the B5 first, answered by the VB3) and then each of them in one 12-bar chorus of pseudo sixties-like soul blues.

Much as I like the B5 (and I *really* do), to my ears, the VB3 comes out glaringly superior again in this comparison. Somehow, the 12 bars with the B5 sound tame, clumsy and ersatz, but a soon as the VB3 enters (1’05”), the sound is right, the rhythm clicks and the temperature rises.

Having said that, I don’t want to discard the possibility that the B5 can be configured to sound more “Jimmy Smith”-like than what I’ve been able to draw from it thus far. (Though I doubt it, cause I’ve tried just about everything there is to try.) So if anyone has any suggestion (preferably with an audio example), that’d be very welcome. And gratefully appreciated.

_
 

EvilDragon

KSP Wizard
I'm thinking that B5 is better suited to jazz, pop and gospel, light and roomy Hammond sounds, whereas VB3 excels at blues and rock and balls-to-the-wall Hammond sounds. Overdrive to me sounds much better in VB3.
 

Raindog

Senior Member
Thanks for the suggestion, Raindog, but it’s not the scanner vibrato. In fact, on or off, the scanner vibrato hardly seems to make any difference, at least not for the timbre which I’m looking for.

The difference between the B5 and the VB3 is happening in (a) the attacks (b) the overall tonal balance, and (c) the impact and energy (which the VB3 has a lot of, and the B5 very little) of each note.

Made another example (very quick, very rough, very sorry): five petite bits given to both instruments (again the B5 first, answered by the VB3) and then each of them in one 12-bar chorus of pseudo sixties-like soul blues.

Much as I like the B5 (and I *really* do), to my ears, the VB3 comes out glaringly superior again in this comparison. Somehow, the 12 bars with the B5 sound tame, clumsy and ersatz, but a soon as the VB3 enters (1’05”), the sound is right, the rhythm clicks and the temperature rises.

Having said that, I don’t want to discard the possibility that the B5 can be configured to sound more “Jimmy Smith”-like than what I’ve been able to draw from it thus far. (Though I doubt it, cause I’ve tried just about everything there is to try.) So if anyone has any suggestion (preferably with an audio example), that’d be very welcome. And gratefully appreciated.

_

I´ll check once I´m home. I´m just wondering because Jimmy Smith style is not a big deal for most Hammond clones. It´s the first three drawbars, sometimes the fourth and the scanner vibrato to c3. The B5 should perform pretty well. Strange but i trust your ears.
Regards
Raindog
 

Ashermusic

Senior Member
Thanks for the suggestion, Raindog, but it’s not the scanner vibrato. In fact, on or off, the scanner vibrato hardly seems to make any difference, at least not for the timbre which I’m looking for.

The difference between the B5 and the VB3 is happening in (a) the attacks (b) the overall tonal balance, and (c) the impact and energy (which the VB3 has a lot of, and the B5 very little) of each note.

Made another example (very quick, very rough, very sorry): five petite bits given to both instruments (again the B5 first, answered by the VB3) and then each of them in one 12-bar chorus of pseudo sixties-like soul blues.

Much as I like the B5 (and I *really* do), to my ears, the VB3 comes out glaringly superior again in this comparison. Somehow, the 12 bars with the B5 sound tame, clumsy and ersatz, but a soon as the VB3 enters (1’05”), the sound is right, the rhythm clicks and the temperature rises.

Having said that, I don’t want to discard the possibility that the B5 can be configured to sound more “Jimmy Smith”-like than what I’ve been able to draw from it thus far. (Though I doubt it, cause I’ve tried just about everything there is to try.) So if anyone has any suggestion (preferably with an audio example), that’d be very welcome. And gratefully appreciated.

_

I agree that the VB3 sounds more like classic Jimmy Smith in your example, but as someone who in the early '70's went to Jimmy's club here in the San Fernando Valley, and heard him play live, as great as he was, his actual B3/Leslie setup was inferior sounding to what some other B3 players, notably the great Webster Lewis in Boston (still the best jazz B3 player I have ever heard live) had.

So while I may want to sound "Jimmy Smith-ish" personally I am not looking to totally nail that sound, and in your example, overall, I prefer the B5.
 

Baron Greuner

Senior Member
Piet on the examples you put up, and based on the examples you played, the VB3 sounds more suited to those style of licks.
B5 sounds harder, but still a great sound for a virtual instrument.
 

re-peat

Senior Member
(...) because Jimmy Smith style is not a big deal for most Hammond clones.
You’d think that, wouldn’t you, but there’s obviously a lot more to that sound than simply pulling out the first three drawbars, engaging the scanner vibrato and adding some (over)drive.

Could it be, for example, that the ‘percussion’ ingredient of the B5 doesn’t have the same impact as the one on the VB3? And, like Mario says (and I agree), that the overal sound and overdrive of the VB3 simply has more balls?
(By the way, comparing those first three drawbars of each instrument, you’ll find that the B5 generates MUCH less body and “oomph” than the VB3. It’s also revealing to check both with a spectrum analyzer.)

If AcousticSamples are still following this thread, I’d love to hear their thoughts on this matter as well.

As a further reference, here is the Jimmy Smith sound in all its glory: an excerpt from “Walk On The Wild Side” (with the Oliver Nelson Big Band), one of Smith’s best recordings in my view, and certainly one that is simply exploding with *that sound*.

_
 

Raindog

Senior Member
You’d think that, wouldn’t you, but there’s obviously a lot more to that sound than simply pulling out the first three drawbars, engaging the scanner vibrato and adding some (over)drive._

Basically that´s what Jimmy Smith did most of the time (and playing like Jimmy Smith helped as well). But you´re obviously right that just copying these settings seems to lead to a completely different sound using different organ models

Could it be, for example, that the ‘percussion’ ingredient of the B5 doesn’t have the same impact as the one on the VB3? And, like Mario says (and I agree), that the overal sound and overdrive of the VB3 simply has more balls?
(By the way, comparing those first three drawbars of each instrument, you’ll find that the B5 generates MUCH less body and “oomph” than the VB3. It’s also revealing to check both with a spectrum analyzer.)
_

You´re right, the sound difference is so obvious that you don´t need a spectrum analyser for confirmation. I did some extensive testing yesterday evening. First of all the percussion sound is different. It is more pronounced with the VB3 and even the fast setting is pretty long. You can adjust this in the B5´s settings so I came much closer to the sound of the VB3 (not saying that this is better). The main difference imo is the amp model. You can change the amp model within the B5´s settings and you get a warmer sound than with the default model. When you totally bypass the B5´s Leslie simulation (which can be done within the speaker preferences) and run the sound through the MVintageRotary plugin by Melda Production ( I downloaded a trial version), you come very close to the VB3 sound (again not saying that this is better).
I disagree a bit concerning the overdrive. I personally prefer the overdrive of the B5 when using subtle settings (never been a fan of Jon Lord type settings). The VB3 overdrive (imo) is better for really distorted sounds where the B5 overdrive sounds like a razor.

Overall I´m not quite sure which sound I like better. I tend to the B5 which sounds more "real" (at least to my memory of the real thing which I played years ago). The VB3 has definitely more "warmth" and "oomph" which is nice but in direct comparison slightly too much. All a matter of taste. I just feel more comfortable with the B5. At the end it´s nice to have both plugins (together they are 150 $ which is a steal) so you can decide which model to use for which occassion ( I only wish, Guido would finally provide the 64 bit version for Mac as I don´t like the VST Bridge included in Cubase too much).

I have about 9 (or more) different piano models why not 2 different models of a B3..........

Regards
Raindog
 
Top Bottom