Nord User Forum

Rusty Mike wrote:As an aside, it’s really nice to see you back on the forum Pablo!

I’ll just add the opinion I’ve stated before. I’d like to see a A1/Electro hybrid. Just organ and synth (with the sample library) plus effects, no pianos. 61 or 73 keys SW action with aftertouch.

+1
+1
=2

Gambold wrote:The best thing Clavia can do is make sure their boards will continue to connect to computers and laptops in the fastest way possible. Go to USB-C for starters.

That wouldn’t do anything unless the storage technology was completely revamped, as well (which of course is inevitably going to happen, eventually).
Right now, the USB protocol is not what is limiting transfer speeds.

Awsome thread!!!

Being a long time user of Nords (and Swede!) I´ve started to doubt the way Nord is going. Nord have made art of going their own way when it comes to offering memory, layers, sounds, samples and so on. Not offering half as much as other brands.... and yet they fill the stages all over the world... I consider my Stage 2 as a Swiss army knife. I don´t have a lot of tools but i can solve almost every music situation with hands on control of everything. Clearly limited possibilities but with some tweaking och fantasy you can do almost everything. And dead-stable!!!

They release of Stage 3 which from reading the forum still isn´t stable and maybe was released to early.... then they stress out a new Electro and Piano just to offer Seamless transition which is a killer feature but which we have learned to work without for many years....

We are used to wait patient for new models because we know they bring new, well considered functions and the units are (after some OS-upgrades) ready for stageuse!

Where is the old Nord-attitude....??? We are not fast, we do it our way, but you can expect good products....

I will go for the Electro 6 HP instead of Stage 3 HP because it covers almost all my needs and is stable (I already own a NE6 61). The seamless transition is a gift from God when programming. What I would have to cover in one program on the stage I can now use 3 programs to cover just because I can switch between programs without interruption in the sound....

Regarding the pipeorgan I agree with ‪Lewthepianoguy, the samples are much more churchorgan than the modelling is. With seamless transition it´s finally possible to ”change” stops without cutting the sound or reverb. So just give us samples of different registrations and we can play our continougigs and services with our red friens!!! So far so good…. but then i discover that the organsamples are preprogrammed with velocity and filter….. there´s no ”normal” churchorgan in the world that is sensible to that…. I wrote to Nord about this but i gues they have their hands full with Stage 3 OS......‬

From these very forums, it always seemed like seamless transitions wasn’t so much something „we have learned to work without for many years“ (I mean, obviously), but rather the single most clamoured-for feature, next to more storage.

cgrafx wrote:The issue here going forward is that technology has moved on. Obviously there would need to be a redesign of the architecture, but m.2 SSD storage is blazing fast and could easily be used as primary storage and then transfer everything to RAM. You can easily transfer 8GB of data from SSD to RAM in under 10 seconds.

I imagine they will do a ground-up redesign at some point. It's tricky, in a low volume industry... a costly redesign has to last through a good number of years in order to pay for itself. So there's a built-in motivation to try to get as most mileage as you can out of a design. (And it's not like people aren't buying them as it is, either.) As for your particular design suggestion, keep in mind that you're talking about not just the cost of the SSD, but the cost of the 8 GB of RAM, as well as whatever else is required to handle the data transfer from one to the other, in terms of hardware, or hardware capable of running the necessary software.

Lewthepianoguy wrote:With reference to AnotherScott's comments of RAM and polyphony. Yes, I've been there with piano polyphony drop off and a few others have as well, I had that with the stage 2 and that crippled me at times.

I was not talking about the Stage 2 (40-60 polyphony, though still worked fine for most), my question was "Do you know anyone who has ever run out of polyphony at 120 on a Nord?" i.e. one of the newer models, which you were saying is still inadequate.

Lewthepianoguy wrote:I'm only trying to show where some customers look at the 1GB of Piano storage against the 2GB on the stage 3 and ask Why?

I suspect that the reason is that they were able to inexpensively upgrade the Nord Piano 3 to the Nord Piano 4 (no price increase, IIRC) by repurposing the board they were already building for the new Electro.

anotherscott wrote:

cgrafx wrote:The issue here going forward is that technology has moved on. Obviously there would need to be a redesign of the architecture, but m.2 SSD storage is blazing fast and could easily be used as primary storage and then transfer everything to RAM. You can easily transfer 8GB of data from SSD to RAM in under 10 seconds.

I imagine they will do a ground-up redesign at some point. It's tricky, in a low volume industry... a costly redesign has to last through a good number of years in order to pay for itself. So there's a built-in motivation to try to get as most mileage as you can out of a design. (And it's not like people aren't buying them as it is, either.) As for your particular design suggestion, keep in mind that you're talking about not just the cost of the SSD, but the cost of the 8 GB of RAM, as well as whatever else is required to handle the data transfer from one to the other, in terms of hardware, or hardware capable of running the necessary software.

Lewthepianoguy wrote:With reference to AnotherScott's comments of RAM and polyphony. Yes, I've been there with piano polyphony drop off and a few others have as well, I had that with the stage 2 and that crippled me at times.

I was not talking about the Stage 2 (40-60 polyphony, though still worked fine for most), my question was "Do you know anyone who has ever run out of polyphony at 120 on a Nord?" i.e. one of the newer models, which you were saying is still inadequate.

Lewthepianoguy wrote:I'm only trying to show where some customers look at the 1GB of Piano storage against the 2GB on the stage 3 and ask Why?

I suspect that the reason is that they were able to inexpensively upgrade the Nord Piano 3 to the Nord Piano 4 (no price increase, IIRC) by repurposing the board they were already building for the new Electro.

I did not say that the stage 3 is inadequate, far from it. just saying that when it comes more to the sample synth behaviour more than anything, polyphony is starved. It doesn't make much sense to have 120 note poly for the piano engine, then far less for the sample side and worse for the synthesis side. that's my point, nothing other, just that. I rely more on particular technologies than most as I'm registered blind, so accessibility and functionality are essential / crucial. It's difficult with other boards where they're either touch interfaces or have poorly thought out UI's etc or in the case of one manufacturer, poor service in the UK and poor stock reliability when it comes to ordering equipment, etc. so, Nord has been my go-to for rigs in most instances, I trust it, like I trust in Nord, but as I said, I wanted in this post to encourage others to be forward thinking, look at new angles as food for thought for our masters, not a negative attack, etc. All I wanted to do was share my feelings regarding how the current product line seems to be missing a few bits and pieces.

OK, saying that, a Stage 4 which is expanded upon, instead of 2 panels (A and B, what about 4 which makes better sense for multi layering / instrument control, etc. I'm actually thinking about working with a sampling company who sample church organs to build voices specifically for the stage, electro and piano series to cover users like myself, never know eh.

Lewthepianoguy wrote:

anotherscott wrote:my question was "Do you know anyone who has ever run out of polyphony at 120 on a Nord?" i.e. one of the newer models, which you were saying is still inadequate

I did not say that the stage 3 is inadequate, far from it. just saying that when it comes more to the sample synth behaviour more than anything, polyphony is starved.

My 120 poly comment was in response to where you had said, "Take the Piano 4...It's a piano with 120 note poly. Ideally let's see the Piano 4 with 256 note poly" -- I was just saying I see no issues with the 120. Remember also that many boards have a single engine for everything, so for example, layered strings or an organ split cut into available piano polyphony. That doesn't happen on the Nord, where the piano has 120 polypony of its own, no matter what additional non-piano split/layered sounds you are using.

Lewthepianoguy wrote:It doesn't make much sense to have 120 note poly for the piano engine, then far less for the sample side and worse for the synthesis side.

VA synthesis uses different technology than sample playback, its requirements are different, and it is common for it to have less polyphony. (And at least in the case of the NS3, the non-piano sample side is the same as the synth side, which is what gives us the cool ability to process the samples through the synth functions). Remember, the NS3 synth is almost an A1, which has 26 polyphony. This isn't just a Nord thing, look at other VA synths like King Korg, Studiologic Sledge, Waldorf Blofeld, Roland System 8... all with polyphony of 25 or less. (Though there are some with more as well.) The new Yamaha MODX has half the polyphony for ts FM synthesis engine as it does for everything else. The point is, it can make sense to have different polyphonies for different sound engines, because the tech requirements for these things are different.

Lewthepianoguy wrote:OK, saying that, a Stage 4 which is expanded upon, instead of 2 panels (A and B, what about 4 which makes better sense for multi layering / instrument control, etc.

Interestingly, I remember reading somewhere that there was a design choice where the Stage 3 could have either had more panels or seamless sound transitions, and they chose the latter.

anotherscott wrote:my question was "Do you know anyone who has ever run out of polyphony at 120 on a Nord?" i.e. one of the newer models, which you were saying is still inadequate

It would be interesting to capture NoteOn/Off and sustain data for a performance from those raising the concerns (say, a complete set of a gig) to a data file, then funnel it into an analysis program (presumably PC/Mac/Linux based) to correlate some heavy analysis and stats. Such as:

• The maximum polyphony actually requested by the controllers during that timeframe,
• How many times that threshold occurred,
• How long did each occurrence last.

Technically, it wouldn't have to be just the max. You could map a whole spectrum of polyphonic use across time.

Of course, this assumes that you're performing something actually worth listening to (i.e., not gratuitously banging away with the sustain pedal held).

anotherscott wrote:

Lewthepianoguy wrote:

anotherscott wrote:my question was "Do you know anyone who has ever run out of polyphony at 120 on a Nord?" i.e. one of the newer models, which you were saying is still inadequate

I did not say that the stage 3 is inadequate, far from it. just saying that when it comes more to the sample synth behaviour more than anything, polyphony is starved.

My 120 poly comment was in response to where you had said, "Take the Piano 4...It's a piano with 120 note poly. Ideally let's see the Piano 4 with 256 note poly" -- I was just saying I see no issues with the 120. Remember also that many boards have a single engine for everything, so for example, layered strings or an organ split cut into available piano polyphony. That doesn't happen on the Nord, where the piano has 120 polypony of its own, no matter what additional non-piano split/layered sounds you are using.

Lewthepianoguy wrote:It doesn't make much sense to have 120 note poly for the piano engine, then far less for the sample side and worse for the synthesis side.

VA synthesis uses different technology than sample playback, its requirements are different, and it is common for it to have less polyphony. (And at least in the case of the NS3, the non-piano sample side is the same as the synth side, which is what gives us the cool ability to process the samples through the synth functions). Remember, the NS3 synth is almost an A1, which has 26 polyphony. This isn't just a Nord thing, look at other VA synths like King Korg, Studiologic Sledge, Waldorf Blofeld, Roland System 8... all with polyphony of 25 or less. (Though there are some with more as well.) The new Yamaha MODX has half the polyphony for ts FM synthesis engine as it does for everything else. The point is, it can make sense to have different polyphonies for different sound engines, because the tech requirements for these things are different.

Lewthepianoguy wrote:OK, saying that, a Stage 4 which is expanded upon, instead of 2 panels (A and B, what about 4 which makes better sense for multi layering / instrument control, etc.

Interestingly, I remember reading somewhere that there was a design choice where the Stage 3 could have either had more panels or seamless sound transitions, and they chose the latter.

Yeah, I know what you mean, workstations differ to the Nord Stage series, It's just the issue of the sample playback / synth engine. Piano is fine, does fine for virtually everything and I'm pleased with it, it's just the sampling side for polyphony, right when you're using strings, pads, etc the next min it voice steals and performs last note priority to next load of generated notes, just wish that was a fair bit higher that's all. I always wanted a PC3 series rig for years but getting hold of a PC3A8 in the UK is impossible now, they're being discontinued by the look of it and getting parts is a swine, so that's out of the window, Anyway, new stage 3 will be here soon. but I suppose I just want something out of the stage 3 it can't easily provide.

Rusty Mike wrote:As an aside, it’s really nice to see you back on the forum Pablo!

I’ll just add the opinion I’ve stated before. I’d like to see a A1/Electro hybrid. Just organ and synth (with the sample library) plus effects, no pianos. 61 or 73 keys SW action with aftertouch.

This would be a nice twist.
The "baby Stage" others are mentioning, in my view already exists: it's the Electro since the 5-6 model.
Stage piano, organ, samples and effects, multitimbral with splits and layers.
95% of anything the average keyboard player will ever need.
Of course, what's missing is a proper synth (with pitch bend and mod wheel, possibly aftertouch).

Mike's suggestion could be great: an organ/synth only board, with sampling capability, pitch bend and mod wheel, drawbars, waterfall keybed with aftertouch.
A hybrid between an Electro and a Wave.
I don't know how well it could sell as a general-purpose instrument without a proper piano section, but for sure it would be a very unique instrument, in very typical Clavia style