The rhodespiano.com site, the official website for the Rhodes Mark 7, has a “Latest News” headline that reads:

Jeff Lorber Review of the New Rhodes Mark 7 in June Keyboard Magazine

They then print his quote from an article:

“If I could bring a Rhodes like that everywhere I go, that would be incredible.”

However, after reading the article in question, this quote has been taken out of context. Here is what Jeff Lorber /actually/ said about the Rhodes Mark 7 (http://www.keyboardmag.com/article/inspiration-by-the/Jun-07/29062):

“I had the feeling that — given my experience with the prototypes —they’ve got a little ways to go to make them perfect. The feel might have been a little bit spongy, but basically, they’re great. Hopefully this will be a way we can play Rhodes pianos that aren’t as beat-up [as heavily-used rental instruments] and get new ones that are much more fun to play. If I could bring a Rhodes like that everywhere I go, that would be incredible.”

When he said he would take a “Rhodes like that everywhere [he went]”, he was referring to “new ones that are much more fun to play.” In fact, he specifically said the Rhodes Mark 7 had spongy action and had a way to go to be perfect.

Seems like the Rhodes Music Corporation (RMC) are misrepresenting what Jeff Lorber was quoted as saying in the article.

Also, RMC quotes Stevie Wonder as saying “You got it better than right, its unbelievable!” However, the “full article” they link to is only a blogger’s post about the Rhodes Mark 7 which seems to be regurgitated information, verbatim, from the RMC website. A cyclical citation? Tsk-tsk. Where is the citation showing that Mr. Wonder actually said this??

If they have such an amazing instrument, why are they resorting to taking quotes out of context, and using unacceptable citations, in order to produce favorable quotes about their piano? If it is indeed a good product, you would think there would be plenty of quotes that /clearly/ praise the piano.

If/When the Rhodes Mark 7 hits the street, one should carefully review the consequences of its light-weight design. Rhodes design engineer Mike Peterson designed the prototype Rhodes Mark IV, which weighed significantly less than previous models. Unfortunately, the reduction in weight had some unintended, and possibly undesirable, side effects:

The weight reduction program succeeded at reducing weight, but introduced a serious side effect. The various non-musical noises made by the piano mechanism increased dramatically. The traditional design made noise too, but the massive wood box kept it contained. The new, thin, lightweight case seemed to amplify the noise, almost like an acoustic guitar body. Of course, none of the noise got into the amplified sound, but when the piano was directly connected to a mixer in a studio, a nearby open microphone could easily pick it up.

http://www.fenderrhodes.com/models/mark4.php

The Mark V weighs in at 100lbs for the 73 key model. The Rhodes Mark 7 73 key model weighs in at approximately 85lbs (http://www.rhodespiano.com/sizes.htm). I am at a loss as to how the Rhodes Mark 7 engineers were able to shave off 15lbs from the Rhodes Mark V design, which weighed 100lbs with lid and sustain pedal. Perhaps they don’t include the sustain pedal in the Mark 7 weight calculations. Perhaps they don’t have a lid for the Rhodes Mark 7….I have yet to see a picture or illustration of a lid for the thing.

It must be one of these two possibilities, because the Rhodes Mark 7’s pictured have the same harp assembly, wooden keys, and aluminum and wood structures as the Mark V. In other words the “guts” appear to be identical between the Mark V and Mark 7. So, if the weight reduction didn’t take place in the “guts”, they had to reduce weight somewhere else. You can’t significantly improve on the weight of the Mark V case….it is thin plastic. So, the only things I think are left are the lid and sustain pedal. Maybe that is how they arrive at the 85lb weight for the 73 key Rhodes Mark 7.

If they did, /somehow/, manage to shave the pounds from the guts or case, I think we will see the same problems Mike Peterson ran into with the Mark IV due to its reduced weight. So…I will hope that they just aren’t including the lid and sustain pedal in the weight. Right?

Anyone else care to take a guess?

As I’ve said before, let’s hope the new Rhodes Music Corporation (RMS) pays more attention to detail with the Rhodes Mark 7 than they do to their website. Multiple grammatical errors on the RMC website have been reported in forums at http://www.fenderrhodes.com/forums. These forums consist of folks who are fans of the vintage Rhodes pianos….and because of that, there is also interest in the new Rhodes Mark 7.

Mysteriously, soon after these errors are reported on this fan-administered website, they are corrected on the RMC website. And this is not only happening with their website. When the Rhodes Mark 7 was unveiled at NAMM 2007, many folks questioned the placement of two USB ports on the face of the Rhodes Mark 7. To most, it seemed like the worst possible place to put such a thing, offering no benefit over a USB port place somewhere else on the piano….say with the other ports (1/4″, MIDI, etc) on the side of the piano.

Again, this feedback was placed on the fan site (www.fenderrhodes.com) and soon after, RMC had photoshopped those USB ports out of all of their images of the Rhodes Mark 7. To my knowledge, no thanks or acknowledgment was given to the fan community for their, what amount to, free consulting services. But I think I speak for many vintage Rhodes fans when I say that no thanks were ever expected. We all want the Rhodes Mark 7 to become a mass-produced reality for one reason or another.

And if we can help make that final product better, we will ultimately benefit….thanks or no thanks.