Hacking a Nord OS

[tsss27]

They have good reason not to make their proprietary Nord Piano format public.

For one, it gives them full control over the Piano Library, which is arguably their biggest asset next to their user interface.

For another, it might allow people to reverse engineer it, which could allow others to extract the piano samples and repackage them.

In any case, it’s their decision.

Don't these same arguments apply to the nsmp format as well? But yet that format is able to be created (though not extracted of course.) I'm afraid I don't see the difference, other than the npno format being more complex. That being said they probably feel that the vast majority of users wouldn't really make use of an NPNO creator utility due to the extra complexity and that is probably a correct assumption.

In terms of getting the samples, virtually all Nord pianos have been sampled. I've even seen numerous companies trying to resell them (some of which I've managed to get taken down.) I also know plenty of people with Nord piano samples that they recorded and loaded into their Yamaha, Kurzweil, etc boards. In my opinion they still don't sound as good as the real deal simply due to the missing resonance samples, but still this has been a thing for quite some time.

[cgrafx]

They have good reason not to make their proprietary Nord Piano format public.

For one, it gives them full control over the Piano Library, which is arguably their biggest asset next to their user interface.

For another, it might allow people to reverse engineer it, which could allow others to extract the piano samples and repackage them.

In any case, it’s their decision.

Don't these same arguments apply to the nsmp format as well? But yet that format is able to be created (though not extracted of course.) I'm afraid I don't see the difference, other than the npno format being more complex. That being said they probably feel that the vast majority of users wouldn't really make use of an NPNO creator utility due to the extra complexity and that is probably a correct assumption.

the nsmp format is single velocity/layer. The secret sauce in the nard format is both the multi-layer capability and the compression algorithm being deployed that allows Nord to package very high quality multi-velocy samples in a comaritivly small footprint.

[tsss27]

the nsmp format is single velocity/layer. The secret sauce in the nano format is both the multi-layer capability and the compression algorithm being deployed that allows Nord to package very high quality multi-velocy samples in a comaritivly small footprint.

The lossless compression algorithm is the same in both formats. I have communicated with one of the original creators of it (who is no longer working at Clavia) as we were discussing another project he was working on which also used this compression scheme. Having an editor for npno files would not enable access to the data inside those files just as it has not done so for nsmp.

At the end of the day though the likelyhood of there ever being such a tool is very close to 0%.

[dmamfmgm]

Don't these same arguments apply to the nsmp format as well? But yet that format is able to be created (though not extracted of course.) I'm afraid I don't see the difference, other than the npno format being more complex. That being said they probably feel that the vast majority of users wouldn't really make use of an NPNO creator utility due to the extra complexity and that is probably a correct assumption.

In terms of getting the samples, virtually all Nord pianos have been sampled. I've even seen numerous companies trying to resell them (some of which I've managed to get taken down.) I also know plenty of people with Nord piano samples that they recorded and loaded into their Yamaha, Kurzweil, etc boards. In my opinion they still don't sound as good as the real deal simply due to the missing resonance samples, but still this has been a thing for quite some time.

Let me try to restate your points. I think this is a divisive topic where people's points of view probably won't change. I'm interested to try to broaden my perspective by understanding the topic thoroughly, so I do this exercise.

1. My paraphrase of tsss27: if Nord released the Nord Sample Editor with the ability to produce nsmp, what stops them from allowing some opportunity to have npno files from people outside of Nord? The added complexity of npno doesn't seem like an inhibitor, in fact, it might be a source of interest in providing new npno files.

2. My paraphrase of tss27: It's easy to sample a Nord piano and play the samples on a Yamaha or Kurzweil or any other sampler. Nobody will fall for this. It gets taken down.

I'll try to channel Nord as a company. If I were Nord and I needed to survive and grow the company, I would keep the two separate - nsmp only for custom single-layer samples, and npno only for using the hardware to the max. Main points being:

• Perfect from the start: The npno product demonstrates how awesome Nord hardware is. It is the main attraction, or one of the main attractions.
• Expensive: It uses a lot of flash space and is worth it because it is almost always active, played, used and makes a big difference in the quality of the final sound.
• Heavily curated: Almost every parameter, choice about the layering and even the mic choices is chosen by the company based on their judgment. It's a package deal: take it or leave it. The user can only tweak a few things.

And I imagine nsmp sits at the other end of the spectrum:

• Ugly: While the hardware does awesome at reproducing the samples, anyone can generate an nsmp from any source. Bad inputs, noise, low quality stuff - anything goes.
• Less expensive for the company: The Nord Sample Editor has gotten simplified over time, showing fewer and fewer of the format's features. It never supported more than 1 layer. Samples are not allowed to use up npno storage space. The whole concept of sampling is about baking all the work into the sample before putting it into the Nord Sample Editor - sound production, if someone really wants to do that, does not involve the company, at all.
• Less investment from the company: The company does no distribution or curation of user nsmp files - they're not trying to become the YouTube of nsmp files. The company spends very little time on the Nord Sample Editor. There are some samples in the Nord Sound Library, when it makes sense, but it's not the main attraction.
• Symbiotic: The support for nsmp reinforces npno. They are in symbiosis. 99% of users might invest 5 minutes in the Nord Sample Editor, but mostly rely on the pre-packaged Nord Sound Library and npno files. Playing samples from this forum or from the internet is usually pretty unique to the song, the artist, the sound design, etc. anyway, so samples tend to get to a good enough point and then nobody needs to change it after that.
• Closed file format: Neither nsmp nor npno are ever intended to become an open format. Every company faces an endless uphill battle if they want to keep their Intellectual Property locked up. Pro artists won't be willing to provide samples in nsmp format if they think it lacks adequate protection.