Nord User Forum

It seems to be a clear marketing step. Apparently NL4 is awful in terms of sales. Clavia would like to improve the selling statistics in that department. So they decided to launch a striped version of NL4. 1299 Euro is much better then 1849 Euro. They might even take NL4 out of production.

If you compare NLA1 to NL2X it's only 200 Euro more and it's worth the money as it had more features including effects, better poliphony etc.

That situation reminds me NL3 introduction back in 2001. Clavia tried to repeat the success of NL1 and NL2. They launched NL3 which was more advanced and 40% more expensive. Apparently NL4 sales was not good enough. So it was taken out of production. Then we saw slightly upgraded ver of NL2 out. NL2X is there for 10 years. It's one of most successful products made by Clavia.

It will interesting to see if NLA1 will repeat the success of NL2. But I have a bad feeling. I would rather call it NL2EX.

Mr_-G- wrote:

NWaveSam wrote:The Nord Lead A1 is a completely different instrument and shouldn't be compared with the Lead (1, 2, 2X, 3, 4) in any way.

Really?
http://www.nordkeyboards.com/products/n ... 20NLA1.pdf

I mean in terms of succession.

Remember that Clavia had a comparison chart with the NL3 and the Wave when the Wave came out, but the Nord Wave was never a successor to the Lead series, instead it was a different instrument in its own.
People thought the Wave was the Lead 4, but well... it's not and it never was, same with the NLA1.
Trust me, in 2 or 3 years time we'll see a Nord Lead 5 and a Nord Lead A2.

I'm still doing my research to find out exactly what it is that separates the A1 from the generic Lead series, but because it was only announced yesterday and it doesn't hit the market until April it's kind of hard to back up my statements, all I can really do is compare it to the release of the Nord Wave... I guess the biggest thing about the A1 is that you can drastically change your sound in a matter of seconds due to the front panel being so well laid out for the musician/producer/sound designer.

Also, somebody said that they studied waveforms or something in university? That's a pretty bad degree, you can learn everything on the internet, but I'm currently doing my masters in sound production and during my bachelors course, we learnt a whole lot about synthesis, and in the masters I'll be learning a whole lot more when I get back.

EDIT: just to give a little insight of why I don't think this new synth will be replacing the NL2X is because the NL2X is the closest thing Clavia has to its original Nord Lead, and it's still selling really, really well. They wouldn't touch the NL2X with a 10ft. pole due to its originality. I honestly can't see the NL2X being upgraded or replaced unless Clavia were to bring out a NL1X which seems utterly pointless seeing as though the NL2X is already a thing.

NWaveSam wrote:
Also, somebody said that they studied waveforms or something in university? That's a pretty bad degree, you can learn everything on the internet, but I'm currently doing my masters in sound production and during my bachelors course, we learnt a whole lot about synthesis, and in the masters I'll be learning a whole lot more when I get back.

Sounds like a contradiction unless you meant "bad ass"

I know plenty of guys with sound production degrees btw... none of them doing anything to do with sound these days... all regretting taking that course and having to spend the next decades paying for it (at least in the UK). Hope you fare better...

I have a BSc/MSc and PhD in computer science but I would not use that to try and berate someone else with my supposedly superior knowledge ...

NWaveSam wrote:

Mr_-G- wrote:

NWaveSam wrote:The Nord Lead A1 is a completely different instrument and shouldn't be compared with the Lead (1, 2, 2X, 3, 4) in any way.

Really?
http://www.nordkeyboards.com/products/n ... 20NLA1.pdf

I mean in terms of succession.

Remember that Clavia had a comparison chart with the NL3 and the Wave when the Wave came out, but the Nord Wave was never a successor to the Lead series, instead it was a different instrument in its own.

[...]

EDIT: just to give a little insight of why I don't think this new synth will be replacing the NL2X is because the NL2X is the closest thing Clavia has to its original Nord Lead, and it's still selling really, really well. They wouldn't touch the NL2X with a 10ft. pole due to its originality. I honestly can't see the NL2X being upgraded or replaced unless Clavia were to bring out a NL1X which seems utterly pointless seeing as though the NL2X is already a thing.

I think nobody said the Nord Lead A1 certainly was a successor of anything.
Fact is you have to compare it to something. The Nord Wave was compared not to the latest Clavia instrument but to the closest Nord at that time in terms of functionalities, closest like in "with just less goodies".
Now the Nord Lead A1 is compared with the Norld Lead 2X, same thing. No A1 vs NL4 comparison, of course. Again, I'm not blaming anyone at Clavia.

NWaveSam wrote:Also, somebody said that they studied waveforms or something in university? That's a pretty bad degree, you can learn everything on the internet, but I'm currently doing my masters in sound production and during my bachelors course, we learnt a whole lot about synthesis, and in the masters I'll be learning a whole lot more when I get back.

Somebody is me, but I feel like you mirsread.

I did not study waveforms or something but waveguides at universtity. The reason why is that I had a Master degree in Physics like ten years ago. So I actually studied vibrant systems for 5 years in a much larger extent than synthesis or guitar strings (which I love to use), and I taught them a bit too. That's the first thing I'm backing my statements on.
Where I've studied wavefroms is in books, on the internet and on synths. I can teach synthesis with equations or knobs, with my brain and my ears if you will:) (whether equations are useful or not is another debate) I've been doing this since even before I heard about vibrant systems at the uni, and I'm still learning a lot, see! That's the second thing I'm backing my statements on.

On a side note, ten years ago, internet was not as rich and reliable as now in terms of contents. Nowadays you certainly can find any information you're looking for, but I can assure you there are many fields where internet will always lack the real interaction with a human researcher or teacher, where unless you write down the equation you won't get through the subject as deep as in uni. Proof? See how many forums and how many questions asked to real humans behind the screen.

So I'm not pretending but I must say I smile when a forumer drops "explaining in one word: waveguides" and then states that studying physics in the uni is weak versus learning on the internet. I'm not trying to offense here, but I feel I cannot let some beliefs be spread that way.

But hey!! I've got some news for myself: this is the human relationships adventure!! All different, always opportunities to learn from!!

orangefunk wrote: I have a BSc/MSc and PhD in computer science but I would not use that to try and berate someone else with my supposedly superior knowledge ...

I did!!!

Okay, you know... I'm out of this *** *** forum. Everyone here is so condescending.

stiiiiiiive wrote:

orangefunk wrote: I have a BSc/MSc and PhD in computer science but I would not use that to try and berate someone else with my supposedly superior knowledge ...

I did!!!

and you did it beautifully...

NWaveSam wrote:Okay, you know... I'm out of this *** *** forum. Everyone here is so condescending.

Can't help but think you brought it on yourself man... but have a good journey...

Like I said I have done pretty much all there is academically and I feel I still know nothing... we're just learning from the day we're born to the day we croak it...