Nord Piano Samples in XL size

[agcohn]

>The older smaller samples almost have toy-piano-like quality. Not usable in my opinion.<

And yet they still have passionate users on this forum, esp the Grand Lady D, the Studio Grand 2, and the Rain piano. These samples always get a lot of praise. So the toy quality apparently isn't evident to everyone. Which brings us back to the mystery - just WHY are these older samples smaller, and what is causing these steady incremental increases:

Studio Grand 2 L sample (2011) - 68mb
Italian Grand L sample (2012) - 97 mb
Velvet Grand L sample (2015) - 106 mb
White Grand L sample (2019) - 155 mb

I'm not sure that "toy-piano-like quality" is the best description of the older samples... "thinner" or "less rich" or "less nuanced" might be more accurate. But everyone has different uses for the samples. I love the White Grand while playing on my own, but I don't think it would be the best option for playing with a band... it can be too rich at times. It's also different if you're just playing the piano sample on its own versus combining it with synth, organs, etc., where maybe a "thinner" piano sound is exactly what you need in order to keep the sound clean.

I'm fairly certain that the reason that the older samples are so much smaller is that they had to be... the Nord Piano 1 and 2 only had 500GB for the Piano Library... while the NP3 / NP4 had 1GB and the NP5/Grand have 2GB. I don't think they're trying to upsell people, it's just that people expect higher quality samples now and the Nord library has grown considerably.

[Gambold]

>it's just that people expect higher quality samples<

The question remains - WHAT is making these samples higher quality and therefore three times larger in size?

[docbop]

>it's just that people expect higher quality samples<

The question remains - WHAT is making these samples higher quality and therefore three times larger in size?

Like and computer file more data more details, more samples taken, more velocities, longer samples, different mic positions, etc, There are some Youtubes showing the process I think Spitfire did a couple or maybe it was Christian Henson's channel. It's just like recording the higher the sample rate and bit depth the bigger the files.

[Tasten-Bert]

>it's just that people expect higher quality samples<

The question remains - WHAT is making these samples higher quality and therefore three times larger in size?

Hi Gambold,

for that reason I took the comparison to the Colossus iOS piano which offers 24! velocity-dependent samples per key. So, taken the 1 to 127 velocity steps of possible touch variations, you‘ll get a different sound every ca. 5 midi steps. I would guess that other, smaller samples only record 6 or 8 different ones and close the gaps with filtering or only volume adjustments.

This, along with full mapping, long release recording and all above mentioned details make the size of a file.

Cheers from Germany

[kirsty]

>it's just that people expect higher quality samples<

The question remains - WHAT is making these samples higher quality and therefore three times larger in size?

Like any audio file the more it is compressed to reduce file size the lower the quality of the resulting sound.

I would suspect less compression to increase the quality is creeping up the file sizes, justified by the fact the recent boards have much more memory and can easily accommodate the larger files now. A 250MB file would have wiped out the whole memory of an older Nord piano, so would have been hard to justify. Now with 2GB to play with its fine.

And of course they want you to upgrade to the latest products, which other music company doesnt

[Gambold]

>And of course they want you to upgrade to the latest products, which other music company doesn't <

I would love to upgrade - unfortunately unlike those other music companies, Clavia doesn't offer anything for me to upgrade to, and hasn't for many years.

[kirsty]

I agree, there hasn't been much in terms of ground-breaking innovation or anything significantly different in the last several years apart from the memory upgrades and perhaps seamless transitions.

I see you have an SV-2 Gambold, I played one in the music shop recently. Nord Acoustic Pianos are clearly superior, but the Korg did feel really lively to play Rhodes on and the Strings are simply incredible. I can't get anything on the Nord to sound anything near as rich and full as that and have tried experimenting with a lot of the Nord samples. What do you think of the SV2 out of interest?

[Gambold]

>What do you think of the SV2 out of interest?<

Hi Kirsty, yes, the SV-2 is great for Rhodes and Wurlis. I see this keyboard as an inexpensive way to have a Fender Rhodes - it even kind of looks like one. It's a lot cheaper and lighter, and it also has other sounds as well, plus a lot of dial-based customization like the Nords do. There is a built-in tube that offers overdrive to the amp sims - I don't use those much so I can't say if it's more a gimmick than anything else. It looks cool. A major plus is the RH3 keybed - the weight and action really help bring out the sounds of the EPs. My Electro is a waterfall keybed so I can't get that same kind of response and bounce.

The downsides are that after the EPs, the rest of the sounds are just so-so, especially compared to what Nord offers. A lot of new players might not notice that, but once you've played a Nord, you are spoiled for life! The acoustic keyboards are adequate - there are quite a few of them but only about 2-3 are worth using. A lot of them sound a little murky to me. I play the "Italian" and the "Rock" ones pretty exclusively - on the Electro most of my time is with either the White or the Bright. The organs are all under-par and can only be customized (sort of) with the software, in a prickly interface that is extensive but cumbersome to use. I just use the Jazz Hammond or whatever it is and the rotor, which requires its own pedal (no double duty for the damper, like on the Electro).

The "samples" like the strings, horns and the rest are somewhat useable but nothing like what Nord offers. Let me know what string samples you liked on the SV-2 - maybe I need to give them another chance! I've never been overwhelmed by Nord's string samples, even though they have like a thousand of them. Most of the time I use an M1 sample that a forum user posted here years ago...it sounds fuller than anything I can find in the Nord sample library.

The SV-2 also has a Clavichord with all the usual options too, but I never play that so I can't comment on it.

Botttom line - this is an excellent stage keyboard for someone who wants to primarily play Rhodes, Wurli, and some acoustic piano. If I wasn't so lazy I would bring it along with my Electro for gigs, and use it for all the EPs and the harder rhythmic songs on acoustic - like I Feel the Earth Move by Carole King. The keybed would help drive those along. But I'm not a spring chicken anymore and I really like the swiss-army features and low-weight portability of the Electro.

While I spend a lot more of my home time on the Nord, I do make an effort to play the SV-2 at least once a week to keep my fingers strong, since waterfall keybeds don't promote good technique, IMHO.

--Eric

[docbop]

>What do you think of the SV2 out of interest?<

Hi Kirsty, yes, the SV-2 is great for Rhodes and Wurlis. I see this keyboard as an inexpensive way to have a Fender Rhodes - it even kind of looks like one. It's a lot cheaper and lighter, and it also has other sounds as well, plus a lot of dial-based customization like the Nords do. There is a built-in tube that offers overdrive to the amp sims - I don't use those much so I can't say if it's more a gimmick than anything else. It looks cool. A major plus is the RH3 keybed - the weight and action really help bring out the sounds of the EPs. My Electro is a waterfall keybed so I can't get that same kind of response and bounce.

The downsides are that after the EPs, the rest of the sounds are just so-so, especially compared to what Nord offers. A lot of new players might not notice that, but once you've played a Nord, you are spoiled for life! The acoustic keyboards are adequate - there are quite a few of them but only about 2-3 are worth using. A lot of them sound a little murky to me. I play the "Italian" and the "Rock" ones pretty exclusively - on the Electro most of my time is with either the White or the Bright. The organs are all under-par and can only be customized (sort of) with the software, in a prickly interface that is extensive but cumbersome to use. I just use the Jazz Hammond or whatever it is and the rotor, which requires its own pedal (no double duty for the damper, like on the Electro).

The "samples" like the strings, horns and the rest are somewhat useable but nothing like what Nord offers. Let me know what string samples you liked on the SV-2 - maybe I need to give them another chance! I've never been overwhelmed by Nord's string samples, even though they have like a thousand of them. Most of the time I use an M1 sample that a forum user posted here years ago...it sounds fuller than anything I can find in the Nord sample library.

The SV-2 also has a Clavichord with all the usual options too, but I never play that so I can't comment on it.

Botttom line - this is an excellent stage keyboard for someone who wants to primarily play Rhodes, Wurli, and some acoustic piano. If I wasn't so lazy I would bring it along with my Electro for gigs, and use it for all the EPs and the harder rhythmic songs on acoustic - like I Feel the Earth Move by Carole King. The keybed would help drive those along. But I'm not a spring chicken anymore and I really like the swiss-army features and low-weight portability of the Electro.

While I spend a lot more of my home time on the Nord, I do make an effort to play the SV-2 at least once a week to keep my fingers strong, since waterfall keybeds don't promote good technique, IMHO.

--Eric

The issue I hear with the SV-2 is your limited on what you can change to sounds during live performance, but if you connect it to a computer and run the SV-2 software you can really drill down into all the sounds.

[Gambold]

That is correct but ultimately you are limited by the essential quality of the sample. The factory settings are pretty much as good as they get. The software is best when making layers of different samples, esp various synths and effects.