Now (2.0) Nord Stage 3 start to get life!

[aureliopenna]

When I say bass I mean bass .. Sorry for the translation .. (middle and bass highs) .. I've tried all the ep and the only one is actually the bright ep5 .. That's more balanced .... The same is true for the acoustic pianos ... First there were not all the low ones ... If I put it in layers with a Pad it's almost scary !!

Which Rhodes or Acoustic Piano, are you feeling more bassy? with or without "soft release"?

[leonardo 1]

Hello .. I never use soft relaise .. The sounds are royal grand and Nefertiti but I always prefer the mk v ... I'm happy for you but I still are not at al...
I have to compare them if I can with another Nord stage 3 ... maybe it's mine ... If I'm the only one to hear this ..? !!

[Mr_-G-]

Have you listened to the instrument with headphones? I wonder if it is your amp which is colouring the sound.
Also can you post a shot mp3 to show the problem?

[baekgaard]

When I say bass I mean bass .. Sorry for the translation .. (middle and bass highs) .. I've tried all the ep and the only one is actually the bright ep5 .. That's more balanced .... The same is true for the acoustic pianos ... First there were not all the low ones ... If I put it in layers with a Pad it's almost scary !!

@leonardo1, I took some time to do a controlled test here. I recorded the EP2 (and EP4) at 4 different velocities (30, 60, 90 and 120) for middle F (F4), C3 and finally at F1 (the lowest F) on both my NS3 with 2.00 and EPs version 6, and on my NE6 using the version 5 EPs. The sound engine in the two devices are very similar, so it's a good test comparing version 5 and 6 EPs to check for any substantial differences.

When normalising to the same output levels between the two devices, I can plot the RMS value of each tone. Note that the RMS level corresponds to the energy content of the sample. It looks like this:

RMS level vs Velocity

RMS_vs_Velocity.PNG (32.41 KiB) Viewed 1683 times

As you can see, there are some small differences, which is likely due to the adjusted curves and new samples, but the energy levels are within +1.4/-0.5 dB for the tones I tested.

I also looked at the differences when plotting only the level of the fundamental frequency (F4, C3 and F1, respectively). It looks like this:

Fundamental Frequency level vs Velocity

Fundamental_vs_Velocity.PNG (34.19 KiB) Viewed 1683 times

The differences are here a little larger, +3.1/-0.6 dB, which indicates that even if the RMS levels (energy content) are quite similar, the tonal spectrum may look different.

To test this, I took the tones that had the largest differences (F1 at velocity 90) and calculated the frequency spectrum for the fundamental frequency and the next 7 overtones, i.e. 8 harmonicsin total from n=1 to n=8.

It looks like this:

Harmonic Spectrum (F1 velocity 90)

Harmonic_Spectrum.PNG (27.56 KiB) Viewed 1683 times

To the left, the levels are plotted independently, relative to the overall baseline (F4 RMS level at velocity 30). To the right, I've compared the two tones, and only plot the difference at each harmonic.

As you can see, the fundamental (F1) and the 3rd overtone (4th harmonics, F3) are somewhat more energy rich, up to +6.7 dB stronger in the v6 sound. Other harmonics, in particular the higher frequency ones, are somewhat attenuated, down to -3.2 dB.

It is possibly that the largest part of the difference is simply in how the sample switching may have changed or new (and better, in my view) samples have been used.

The tentative conclusion, for the tones I tested, is that the overall energy content is quite similar also in the low end, so the overall balance hasn't changed that much.

The overtone spectrum (of the EP2) may have changed somewhat, with a bit stronger fundamental and 4th order harmonics and a bit less high end content. Taking into account how the ear perceives sound levels, the v6 actually would sound 1 dB weaker without compensation (for this tone), but since there is a small positive adjustment in the overall level, they end up SOUNDING as if they were at the same loudness level (i.e. similar db(A) level).

Now, to my ears, the v6 sound a little more bass heavy (as I also measure, due to the increased 1st and 4th order harmonics) -- and as you also say. But if you need -15 dB adjustment in the low end, there is something terribly wrong. The actual differences are MUCH smaller than this, and is largely a matter of taste, I think. Something like maybe a -3 dB lower end cut should be more right.

If you, by the way use the speaker amp, then much of the lowend (v5 and v6) goes away.

Hope this helps to clarify a bit what goes on.

[leonardo 1]

You have done an outstanding job. Congratulations and good. Thank you .. I think this ns 3 is a beautiful keyboard but much more refined and excellent in the studio .. In the live has lost some 'effectiveness and sound more raw .. For me the low are too many but I will try to cut the bass from a good mixer .. because the equalizer of our 3 is not beautiful ... Thanks again

[leonardo 1]

Sorry for the translation .. I meant that the old ones are more effective in live .. And less in the studio

[23skidoo]

Not sure I agree, the new ones sound fantastic to me, I think a raw piano sound is better live, since the venue will usually contribute the ambience the sample seems to be missing (just like a real acoustic piano in that space will). If you're not getting that effect when playing live, maybe consider where your speakers are placed, whether or not you're using too much monitoring versus FOH (and what kind of monitoring) and how you're sitting "in the mix" rather than by yourself. And I didn't notice any horrible bass suddenly appearing at all - the new instruments sound slightly better, a little fuller perhaps, but in subtle ways that are all improvements, to my ears. Nothing like 3dB or more anywhere!

[aureliopenna]

To my ears there is lack of mid range on fundamentals on new rhodes, which I can found on the real rhodes BTW, where the bass notes aren't that loud eighter. So yes, I do agree the samples (or new samples) sound too low and rawless than NS2 or old ones BUT doesn't mean that you have to push 14db down on the low to lowering bass response. Seems like your speaking are "telling" you some lies. I'd suggest you to check with a good headphone or on another studio reference, or even in a known trustable PA speaker

[leonardo 1]

I respect your opinions and thank you for answering me. I managed to do a test with the NS 88 classic rev c. I used studio grand 2 is mark v. Without any equalization the sounds were brighter to my ears than the NS 88 3..Unfortunately I could not make any video and audio ... By now I'm one of the few who think so and I do not want to convince anyone. It is a personal taste and anyway I was pleased to hear your opinions and for this I thank you again .. Ns is still a super keyboard .. Happy New Year

[Mr_-G-]

Leonardo1 how are you testing all this? Several suggestions have been made to you but you do not seem to have answered any of those. What amp? headpg
hones? Mono or strero? If mono how are you doing it? Left? Right? Mono button? Add channels? Have you initialised tha piano section? Can you do a simple recording in audacity?