But from where comes the music?

[Dave Cole]

I found this some months ago researching Hammond Organ principles.

Hope you guys enjoy it.

Dave Cole
* * * * * * *
The HAMMOND Tonewheel Generator
Theory Of Operation
from Electric Organs Simplified
by "Stevens Irwin-Corey," 1951)

The HAMMOND tone generator is the successful result of the attempt to
bring perfection
to the crudely conceived idea of a machine that would not only supply
inverse
reactive current of equally-tempered frequencies for use in
unilateral phase detractors, but would also be capable of automatically
synchronizing cardinal grammeters. Basically, the only new principle
involved is that instead of the musical frequencies being generated by the
relative motion of conductors and fluxes, they are produced by the medial
interaction of magneto-reluctance and capacitive directance.
The tone generator has a base-plate of prefabulated amulite, surmounted
by
a malleable logarithmic casing in such a way that the two spurving bearings
are in a direct line with the pentametric fan. The latter consists simply
of six hydrocoptic marzelvanes, soffitted to the ambifacient lunar waneshaft
in such a way that side fumbling is effectively prevented. The main windings
are of the normal lotus/delta type placed in panendermic semi-boloid slots
in the stators, every seventh conductor being connected by a non-reversible
tremulant pipe to the differential girdle spring on the "up" end of the
grammeters.
Forty-one manestically spaced grouting brushes are arranged to feed
HAMMOND
Generator Oil into the rotor slipstream. This oil is a mixture of high
'S'-value phenylhydrabenzamine and 5% reminative 1,2,1-tetryliodihexamane.
The oil has a high specific percosity when measured against P=2.5C^N^6.7
where 'N' equals the diathetical evolute of retrograde temperature/phase
disposition and 'C' is Cholmondeley's annular grillage coefficient. Before
adding oil to the generator, 'N' should be measured with the aid of a
metapolar refractive pilfrometer, although adequate results can be obtained
using a Hopper transcendental dadoscope.
An unusual feature of the tone generator is the nubing together of the
regurgitative purwell and the supremative wennel-sprocket. This exclusive
feature is only possible due to the use of anhydrous nangling pins, enabling
the kryptonastic bolling shim to be tankered.
It should be noted that the spiral decommutator is of an unusually
robust
configuration. This is necessary to endure the large quasi-piaestic
stresses in the gremling studs; the latter are specially designed to hold
the roffit bars to the spamshaft. In addition, wending is prevented by a
simple addition of polykrapoline to the living sockets, ensuring practically
perfect running. The operating point is maintained as near as possible to
the H.F. REM peak by constantly fromaging the bitumogenous spandrels. This
is a distinct advance on the standard nivel-sheave in that no dramcock oil
is required once the phase detractors are remissed.
Later versions of the tone generator are equipped to operate nofer
trunnions whenever a barescent skor motion is required, in conjunction with
a drawn reciprocating dingle arm to reduce sinusoidal depleneration. It may
be found that some earlier generators have had this modification
field-retrofitted .

with special thanks to my HamTekker friend, Eric Tucker.
Eric adapted this article from an earlier work, "The Turbo-Encabulator in
Industry" by J.H. Quick in IEE Student's Quarterly Journal, vol 15, no. 58,
December 1944, p. 22.
Copywrong 1999 by tucker@paccar.com
Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution, appropriation of text or
graphics,
quotes out of context and deliberate distortions of content are not only
expected but encouraged.
Knock yourself out!
All rights reversed.
* * * *
DC
--
America's abundance was not created by public
sacrifices to 'the common good,'
but by the productive genius of free men
who pursued their own personal interests
and the making of their own private fortunes.
Ayn Rand

 

[Richard Henry]

But from where comes the music?

I found this some months ago researching Hammond Organ principles.

"Phase detractors" sounds like something you could sell extremem audiophiles.

 

[Bob Stephens]

On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 06:38:12 GMT, Dave Cole wrote:

I found this some months ago researching Hammond Organ principles.

Hope you guys enjoy it.

Dave Cole
* * * * * * *
The HAMMOND Tonewheel Generator
Theory Of Operation
from Electric Organs Simplified
by "Stevens Irwin-Corey," 1951)

The HAMMOND tone generator is the successful result of the attempt to
bring perfection
to the crudely conceived idea of a machine that would not only supply
inverse
reactive current of equally-tempered frequencies for use in
unilateral phase detractors, but would also be capable of automatically
synchronizing cardinal grammeters. Basically, the only new principle
involved is that instead of the musical frequencies being generated by the
relative motion of conductors and fluxes, they are produced by the medial
interaction of magneto-reluctance and capacitive directance.
The tone generator has a base-plate of prefabulated amulite, surmounted
by
a malleable logarithmic casing in such a way that the two spurving bearings
are in a direct line with the pentametric fan. The latter consists simply
of six hydrocoptic marzelvanes, soffitted to the ambifacient lunar waneshaft
in such a way that side fumbling is effectively prevented. The main windings
are of the normal lotus/delta type placed in panendermic semi-boloid slots
in the stators, every seventh conductor being connected by a non-reversible
tremulant pipe to the differential girdle spring on the "up" end of the
grammeters.
Forty-one manestically spaced grouting brushes are arranged to feed
HAMMOND
Generator Oil into the rotor slipstream. This oil is a mixture of high
'S'-value phenylhydrabenzamine and 5% reminative 1,2,1-tetryliodihexamane.
The oil has a high specific percosity when measured against P=2.5C^N^6.7
where 'N' equals the diathetical evolute of retrograde temperature/phase
disposition and 'C' is Cholmondeley's annular grillage coefficient. Before
adding oil to the generator, 'N' should be measured with the aid of a
metapolar refractive pilfrometer, although adequate results can be obtained
using a Hopper transcendental dadoscope.
An unusual feature of the tone generator is the nubing together of the
regurgitative purwell and the supremative wennel-sprocket. This exclusive
feature is only possible due to the use of anhydrous nangling pins, enabling
the kryptonastic bolling shim to be tankered.
It should be noted that the spiral decommutator is of an unusually
robust
configuration. This is necessary to endure the large quasi-piaestic
stresses in the gremling studs; the latter are specially designed to hold
the roffit bars to the spamshaft. In addition, wending is prevented by a
simple addition of polykrapoline to the living sockets, ensuring practically
perfect running. The operating point is maintained as near as possible to
the H.F. REM peak by constantly fromaging the bitumogenous spandrels. This
is a distinct advance on the standard nivel-sheave in that no dramcock oil
is required once the phase detractors are remissed.
Later versions of the tone generator are equipped to operate nofer
trunnions whenever a barescent skor motion is required, in conjunction with
a drawn reciprocating dingle arm to reduce sinusoidal depleneration. It may
be found that some earlier generators have had this modification
field-retrofitted .

with special thanks to my HamTekker friend, Eric Tucker.
Eric adapted this article from an earlier work, "The Turbo-Encabulator in
Industry" by J.H. Quick in IEE Student's Quarterly Journal, vol 15, no. 58,
December 1944, p. 22.
Copywrong 1999 by tucker@paccar.com
Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution, appropriation of text or
graphics,
quotes out of context and deliberate distortions of content are not only
expected but encouraged.
Knock yourself out!
All rights reversed.
* * * *
DC

I had a Hammond B3 stored in a farmhouse in Vermont while I was away at
school. One day I took the back off to add some "high 'S'-value
phenylhydrabenzamine and 5% reminative 1,2,1-tetryliodihexamane." to the
tone generator and discovered a family of mice nesting inside. I always
assumed there was some sort of rodent - powered treadmill powering the
thing anyway, so I left them alone.

Bob

 

[JeffM]

Hammond Organ principles
Dave Cole

Heh.

Laurens Hammond (originally a clock maker)
was as brilliant at business as BillG.

His early models used 2 tone wheel generators.
His guys then proceeded to invent "the Scanner"
(a much simpler assembly than a tone generator),
a motor-driven air-dielectric capacitor
with one rotor plate and multiple stator plates.

In subsequent models he included the scanner,
removed 1 of the (massively labor-intensive) tone wheel generators,
and priced the organs as though they still had 2.

 

[Glenn Ashmore]

Wish he had made the D*^#ed things a little lighter. I hauled Dr.
John's B3 and tone cabinet around the country for 2 years. Cussed that
mutha from Puerto Rico to Portland Oregon.

JeffM wrote:

Hammond Organ principles
Dave Cole


Heh.

Laurens Hammond (originally a clock maker)
was as brilliant at business as BillG.

His early models used 2 tone wheel generators.
His guys then proceeded to invent "the Scanner"
(a much simpler assembly than a tone generator),
a motor-driven air-dielectric capacitor
with one rotor plate and multiple stator plates.

In subsequent models he included the scanner,
removed 1 of the (massively labor-intensive) tone wheel generators,
and priced the organs as though they still had 2.

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

 

[JeffM]

Hammond Organ principles
Dave Cole

Laurens Hammond...removed 1 of the...tone wheel generators,
and priced the organs as though they still had 2.
JeffM

Wish he had made the D*^#ed things a little lighter.
Glenn Ashmore

When Baldwin built their blocking-oscillator-based Model 5 in 1952,
it was the beginning of the end for Hammond's tone wheel generator.
Having to oil your organ (so to speak) was a thing of the past.
The amount of labor required to build that monstrosity
just couldn't compete with (eventually) IC-based binary division
(and later 2^-12 top-octave generators).
It ammazed me how long they hung in there.

With "true" electronic organs starting with a square wave
and filtering out what wasn't wanted,
it never made sense to me that folks stayed with the Hammond Sound(tm)
where you used a few soft-edged waveforms in an additive process
where you could never approach getting authentic strings and reeds.

....and as you said there was the *lugging* factor.

 

[Bob Stephens]

On 8 Apr 2004 17:03:46 -0700, JeffM wrote:

Hammond Organ principles
Dave Cole

Laurens Hammond...removed 1 of the...tone wheel generators,
and priced the organs as though they still had 2.
JeffM

Wish he had made the D*^#ed things a little lighter.
Glenn Ashmore

When Baldwin built their blocking-oscillator-based Model 5 in 1952,
it was the beginning of the end for Hammond's tone wheel generator.
Having to oil your organ (so to speak) was a thing of the past.
The amount of labor required to build that monstrosity
just couldn't compete with (eventually) IC-based binary division
(and later 2^-12 top-octave generators).
It ammazed me how long they hung in there.

With "true" electronic organs starting with a square wave
and filtering out what wasn't wanted,
it never made sense to me that folks stayed with the Hammond Sound(tm)
where you used a few soft-edged waveforms in an additive process
where you could never approach getting authentic strings and reeds.

...and as you said there was the *lugging* factor.

Oh - My - God. I can't believe what I just read. Top octave generators
driving filtered square wave generators produced sounds almost as appealing
to the ear as a hamster pissing on a flat rock. Might have looked grand to
a nerd on a 'scope, but definitely not ear candy. And what do you mean by
"soft-edged waveforms" ? How many edges can you count on a sine wave?

Bob

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Bob Stephens <stephensyomamadigita
l@earthlink.net> wrote (in <1o5i2e4npp891$.1ivaicb03deh6.dlg@40tude.net>
) about 'But from where comes the music?', on Fri, 9 Apr 2004:

How many edges can you count on a sine wave?

It has an infinite number, so you can't count them.(;-)

How can it have an infinite number? At an arbitrary value of x, none of
the derivatives of sin(x) vanish, so the curve is infinitely rough on an
infinitesimal scale. So it has an infinity of edges.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[JeffM]

Hammond Organ principles
Dave Cole

...additive process
...authentic strings and reeds
JeffM

filtered square wave generators produced [unappealing] sounds
Bob Stephens

You're getting near the point, but you *just* missed it.
To get the complex sound of strings--and especially that of reeds--
you need the harmonics in a square wave to begin
then filter out what you don't need.

Adding flute sounds together--the Hammond Sound(tm)--doesn't get you there.
A Tibia or Diapason? OK.
A Dulciana, Vox, or Saxaphone? Fuhgetaboutit.

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that JeffM <jeffm_@email.com> wrote (in
<f8b945bc.0404090952.30e63c7b@posting.google.com&gt about 'But from where
comes the music?', on Fri, 9 Apr 2004:

You're getting near the point, but you *just* missed it.
To get the complex sound of strings--and especially that of reeds--
you need the harmonics in a square wave to begin
then filter out what you don't need.

One way. Start with all the odd harmonics and throw some away.

Adding flute sounds together--the Hammond Sound(tm)--doesn't get you there.
A Tibia or Diapason? OK.
A Dulciana, Vox, or Saxaphone? Fuhgetaboutit.

Start with harmonically-related pure(ish) tones and you can get exactly
the same result as from the square wave. If you choose the right tones,
of course.

I suspect that any failings of the Hammond synthesis were due to not
choosing the right tones, or not choosing enough of them.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[Bob Stephens]

On 9 Apr 2004 10:52:27 -0700, JeffM wrote:

Hammond Organ principles
Dave Cole

...additive process
...authentic strings and reeds
JeffM

filtered square wave generators produced [unappealing] sounds
Bob Stephens

You're getting near the point, but you *just* missed it.
To get the complex sound of strings--and especially that of reeds--
you need the harmonics in a square wave to begin
then filter out what you don't need.

Adding flute sounds together--the Hammond Sound(tm)--doesn't get you there.
A Tibia or Diapason? OK.
A Dulciana, Vox, or Saxaphone? Fuhgetaboutit.

Well OK if you're going to talk about harmonics, then let's get back to the
top octave divider issue. As anyone who has tuned a piano - or even a
guitar for that matter - by hand knows, the ear is a non-linear instrument.
You need to "stretch" the thirds and fifths if you plan on playing chords.
If you tune the intervals numerically, the resulting harmonic series'
generated by even a triad are physically painful to a trained ear. It
renders an acoustic piano unplayable, and makes all those electronic organs
from the '60's just sound awful.

Bob

BTW in theory using additive Fourier synthesis one shouild eventually be
able to build a square wave by adding enough harmonics with the proper
amplitude relationships.

BTW (cont.) WRT Jazz, Blues, R&B & Rock 'n Roll - Hammond Rules!
And leave my Tibia out of this

Bob

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Bob Stephens <stephensyomamadigita
l@earthlink.net> wrote (in <emqgvcijcvw0.15f37mp34p234$.dlg@40tude.net&gt
about 'But from where comes the music?', on Fri, 9 Apr 2004:

As anyone who has tuned a piano - or even a
guitar for that matter - by hand knows, the ear is a non-linear instrument.

This isn't due to the ear; it's a fundamental property of numbers, and
that puzzled the Greeks and their successors no end. Until Bach and his
contemporaries came upon the 'well-tempered' scale.

There is a quick illustration of the number thing, but I can't remember
it. But if you make the fifth G:C exactly a 3/2 frequency ratio, and
then the fifth d:G also 3/2, you find the tone D:C has a frequency ratio
of 9/8. That's OK so far, but that fraction is not a perfect square, so
the semitone can't have a simple fractional frequency ratio.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[Joerg]

Jeff, with some Hammonds you can actually almost do that. We have an M-3 which
instead of preselect instrument settings has drawbars where the harmonics can
be gradually reduced or increased. Works nicely, except that I haven't
completely restored the organ yet (generator still squeals). The sound is
wonderful, like sitting in a cathedral.

Regards, Joerg.

 

[JeffM]

Adding flute sounds together--the Hammond Sound(tm)--
doesn't get you there.
JeffM

using additive Fourier synthesis...build a square wave
by adding enough harmonics with the proper amplitude relationships
Bob Stephens

You keep getting closer, but you don't get the A yet.

Here's the final bit:
When you press a key, you aren't closing 1 switch contact.
Under each key in the keyboard is a stack of key contacts.

With a 16-foot stop selected (a high-end instrument),
when you press a key which is at the low end of the manual
you engage one contact for each of these ranks:
16', 8', 4', 2', 1' (plus the thirds and fifths).
These are attenuated for proper balance, summed, and filtered.
(Obviously, higher pitched stops
have fewer available signals to sum and provide a thinner sound.
Luckily, the ear is a bit more forgiving up there.)

WRT Jazz, Blues, R&B & Rock 'n Roll - Hammond Rules!

Starting about Bach's time, craftsmen really started to figure out

how to build pipe organs that sounded good. †
For centuries builders kept improving--then came electronics.
Where before
you pressed a key and it took time for the wind to make the pipe speak,
or you pressed the expression pedal
and it took time for the shutters of the pipe chamber
to close and attenuate the volume.
With muscle power filling the wind chests,
it was just to costly to dump wind
to get vibrato on ranks of the largest pipes.

With organs that were electronic,
the rules didn't matter any more for some (e.g. Hammond).
A key contact that went POP was OK.
A potentiometer that brought up the volume RIGHT NOW was OK.
A vibrato oscillator that modulated EVERY TONE on the instrument
(including the Bombard) was OK.

There's your Hammond Sound(tm).
People who had never heard an actual pipe organ thought
*that's what an organ is supposed to sound like*.

OTOH, with a common shaft and a synchronous motor
a Hammond never went out of tune.
(Always a chuckle to hear someone say that theirs is.)

Then there were folks like Baldwin
who tried to replicate the physical world using electronics.
† e.g. Chiff is a speech defect
--a percussive attack when the wind first hits the lip of the pipe.
There is a technique whereby the lip is filed to remove it.
For centuries craftsmen tried to get chiff out of organ pipes.
Along came Baldwin and decided
*lets add a Chiff Generator to the Model 11*
(the last of their discrete transistor models).
You could dial in as much chiff on the Great manual as you wanted;
you could make it sound like a xylophone if that suited you.

There's your 2 schools of thought on electronic organs.

 

[Bob Stephens]

On 9 Apr 2004 21:43:04 -0700, JeffM wrote:

Adding flute sounds together--the Hammond Sound(tm)--
doesn't get you there.
JeffM

using additive Fourier synthesis...build a square wave
by adding enough harmonics with the proper amplitude relationships
Bob Stephens

You keep getting closer, but you don't get the A yet.
Here's the final bit:
I/m not sure we're discussing the same topic anymore. I don't get the A

because there never was any Q...

When you press a key, you aren't closing 1 switch contact.
Under each key in the keyboard is a stack of key contacts.

Same as the Hammond B3 BTW. Many players had the touch to selectively key

in the harmonics by not fully depressing the keys.

<SNIP>

WRT Jazz, Blues, R&B & Rock 'n Roll - Hammond Rules!

SNIP

With organs that were electronic,
the rules didn't matter any more for some (e.g. Hammond).
A key contact that went POP was OK.

In fact, it was a desired effect. Hammond called it Percussion and It
accentuated the fourth harmonic IIRC. There was also a resistor switched in
to attenuate the volume in this mode which was the first thing rock players
yanked out to get that Keith Emerson (Emerson Lake and Palmer) sound.

A potentiometer that brought up the volume RIGHT NOW was OK.
A vibrato oscillator that modulated EVERY TONE on the instrument
(including the Bombard) was OK.

There's your Hammond Sound(tm).

They both have their place - Pipe organs in monasteries. B3's in
nightclubs.

OTOH, with a common shaft and a synchronous motor
a Hammond never went out of tune.
(Always a chuckle to hear someone say that theirs is.)

Another populuar trick was to momentarily switch of the generator for a
pseudo pitch bend effect. Some Leslies also had a "Brake" which switched a
diode across the horn rotor motor and torqued the Doppler effect.

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Bob Stephens <stephensyomamadigita
l@earthlink.net> wrote (in <16s1ymc89phf6.1ioyys8v81inb.dlg@40tude.net&gt
about 'But from where comes the music?', on Sat, 10 Apr 2004:

On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 22:17:02 +0100, John Woodgate wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that Bob Stephens <stephensyomamadigita
l@earthlink.net> wrote (in <emqgvcijcvw0.15f37mp34p234$.dlg@40tude.net&gt
about 'But from where comes the music?', on Fri, 9 Apr 2004:

As anyone who has tuned a piano - or even a
guitar for that matter - by hand knows, the ear is a non-linear instrument.

This isn't due to the ear; it's a fundamental property of numbers, and
that puzzled the Greeks and their successors no end. Until Bach and his
contemporaries came upon the 'well-tempered' scale.

There is a quick illustration of the number thing, but I can't remember
it. But if you make the fifth G:C exactly a 3/2 frequency ratio, and
then the fifth d:G also 3/2, you find the tone D:C has a frequency ratio
of 9/8. That's OK so far, but that fraction is not a perfect square, so
the semitone can't have a simple fractional frequency ratio.

I seem to remember that the relationship between adjacent semitones in the
equally tempered scale is the 12th root of 2. ie (Freq of C)*(12th root of
2) = C#. (I don't know how to draw radicals in ASCII.)

Yes. I was trying to explain why 'just intonation' doesn't allow you to
play in different keys. 2^(1/12) = 1.05946..., while the semitone that I
referred to has a frequency ratio of sqrt(9/8) = 1.06066. But if one
semitone in the octave is that big, the other one must be smaller; they
can't be equal. To be equal, they must both have a ratio of 1.053... and
then two semitones don't equal a whole tone. There is no solution; the
well-tempered scale is the best compromise overall.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[Rich Grise]

"John Woodgate" <jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote in message

I read in sci.electronics.design that JeffM <jeffm_@email.com> wrote (in
....
You're getting near the point, but you *just* missed it.
To get the complex sound of strings--and especially that of reeds--
you need the harmonics in a square wave to begin
then filter out what you don't need.

One way. Start with all the odd harmonics and throw some away.

Adding flute sounds together--the Hammond Sound(tm)--doesn't get you
there.
A Tibia or Diapason? OK.
A Dulciana, Vox, or Saxaphone? Fuhgetaboutit.

Start with harmonically-related pure(ish) tones and you can get exactly
the same result as from the square wave. If you choose the right tones,
of course.

I suspect that any failings of the Hammond synthesis were due to not
choosing the right tones, or not choosing enough of them.
--
I had always assumed that Hammond made the tones by carving the

wheel into an actual mechanical image of the waveshape. (Of course,
I conveniently ignored the question, "Then, how do they get
different pitches?" I assumed "More cogs on the wheel.")

Apparently, that's not accurate. Any help here?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[JeffM]

you don't get the A yet.
JeffM
I don't get the A because there never was any Q.
Bob Stephens

I was trying to be glib. "A" was as in grade.

When you press a key, you aren't closing 1 switch contact.
Under each key in the keyboard is a stack of key contacts.
Same as the Hammond B3 BTW. Many players had the touch to selectively key
in the harmonics by not fully depressing the keys.

I neglected 1 point:

The Hammond starts with simpler waveforms, so the result is less complex.

They both have their place
--Pipe organs in monasteries. B3's in nightclubs.

To each his own said the old maid as she kissed the cow.

 

[Dave Cole]

in article f8b945bc.0404081603.47a3df94@posting.google.com, JeffM at
jeffm_@email.com wrote on 4/8/04 19:03:

Hammond Organ principles
Dave Cole

Wish he had made the D*^#ed things a little lighter.
Glenn Ashmore

Too True(tm)

When Baldwin built their blocking-oscillator-based Model 5 in 1952,
it was the beginning of the end for Hammond's tone wheel generator.
Having to oil your organ (so to speak) was a thing of the past.
The amount of labor required to build that monstrosity
just couldn't compete with (eventually) IC-based binary division
(and later 2^-12 top-octave generators).
It ammazed me how long they hung in there.

With "true" electronic organs starting with a square wave
and filtering out what wasn't wanted,
it never made sense to me that folks stayed with the Hammond Sound(tm)
where you used a few soft-edged waveforms in an additive process
where you could never approach getting authentic strings and reeds.

...and as you said there was the *lugging* factor.

I still can't find anything else with quite the richness and diversity of
sounds as the Hammond TG.

Why else do so many top-of-their-craft blues/rock/jazz/etc. musicians
continue to *lug* their Hammond/Leslie rigs around?

Maybe their Social Concience(tm) dictates hiring roadies and drivers to move
these behemoths around? ;-)
Dave Cole

 

[Dave Cole]

in article mehdc.2172$4Y2.754@lakeread04, Glenn Ashmore at gashmore3@cox.net
wrote on 4/8/04 13:55:

Wish he had made the D*^#ed things a little lighter. I hauled Dr.
John's B3 and tone cabinet around the country for 2 years. Cussed that
mutha from Puerto Rico to Portland Oregon.

JeffM wrote:

Hammond Organ principles
Dave Cole


Heh.

Laurens Hammond (originally a clock maker)
was as brilliant at business as BillG.

His early models used 2 tone wheel generators.
His guys then proceeded to invent "the Scanner"
(a much simpler assembly than a tone generator),
a motor-driven air-dielectric capacitor
with one rotor plate and multiple stator plates.

In subsequent models he included the scanner,
removed 1 of the (massively labor-intensive) tone wheel generators,
and priced the organs as though they still had 2.

IIRC, the Scanner was designed to add a tremolo/vibrato effect to offset the
popularity of the Leslie cabinets.

I dont think they completely succeeded.
Dave Cole