Nord User Forum

Last week i played the new Kurzweil Forte and i liked the Rhodes very very much! I'm not sure but i think they are as good as the great Kronosrhodes. For sure they are much better than those in my Nord.

I'm happy to read your opinion about Nord rhodes sounds jazzystu. Yes nord proposes thin rhodes sound, it's a fact...and great pianos... so ? If you play or listen the ep7 démo sound, i'm sorry but it doesn't sound good at all to me. I owned B3/leslie, 4 rhodes, Clavinet etc, and the rhodes mk1 besides me is an other word.
Nord, what happened with rhodes sounds ? 8 MB, 12 MB, 35 mb ? People expect a BIG rhodes of 100 MB (that is the minimum) You must listen to us cause a lot of other manufacturers sounds so better.
Korg for instance understood that artefacts and memory make the real sound, or sound real, as the leakage and crosstalk in Hammond.. Your rhodes are almost toys. Fortulately there is effects, good effects, but if you are a funky jazz pianist, you cannot expres yourself really with your thin rhodes sound...sorry

Measuring quality just by size of a file makes no sense at all. You can fill as much file space as you want, but if it is not properly mapped velocity/layer wise, it will probably make little difference.
Thinking about it I really do not hope for a 100MB piano, that would mean I need to remove other samples. Instead I wish a better velocity mapping of the layers and also across the keyboard. I doubt that this would inflate the sample size too much.
The issue I have on the right part of the keboard is that playing harder does not sound *louder*. It has a different sound, but not louder.
The Wurlitzer amped is a great improvement and is not a massive file size, so I hope Clavia can re-master some of the existing samples so they have better dynamics.

@ lordy
People do NOT expect a BIG file size. They expect sound improvments.

Electric sounds don't need massive amount of memory but well sampled and mapped layers.
A 50 mb or more Rhodes makes no sense.
Obviously that's just my opinion.

Mr_-G- wrote: The issue I have on the right part of the keboard is that playing harder does not sound *louder*. It has a different sound, but not louder.

Is your compressor on?

Ramon

..interesting answers. Clavia must Improve velocity mapping of the layers, i agree. But i think all the same that the mk1 rhodes sound is too thin, lacks of body. I can't compare with my real mk1 in terms of layers, and volume/dynamic response. Sure that if clavia release 100 MB rhodes, they would change their politic of memory, increasing it, increasing it really.

mon8169 wrote: Is your compressor on?

Unfortunately not.

One more vote supporting the approach of tweaking the Rhodes sounds. First I felt that the Rhodes samples are too weak, but now when I look back I note that I'm actually quite happy, particularly with many modified versions of the original samples. The effects section etc. does a good job with them. I would not say no to some new interesting Rhodes samples. I still want them. But now I like the existing ones too and would not give most of them away.

Damm.. This thread is tough to read because a NS2 seemed to be solving a lot of what I was looking for solid Rhodes sounds

The thing I am struggling to understand is the following:
- Most of the comments are harsh on the Nord Rhodes: Thin, weak,..
- When listening to online demos (and not just by the Nord rep), the Rhodes models sound pretty good, maybe not all of them, but they certainly do the trick from an audio perspective
- I played with a keyboard player who was using an E3 and his rendition of Miles Davis' Bitches Brew Era tunes (using Rhodes) were quite realistic

Therefore it sounds to me that, unless you are interested in recording a solo Rhodes track and/or are a purist/vintage collector, the Rhodes sounds are pretty usable for recording purposes when used in conjunction with other instruments.

No?