Nord User Forum

Just have a look at the very top of the screenshot - it clearly says „sales rank“ - haven’t you seen that?

The way you get to it is by going to the Stage 4 product page at the shop, and below the specs it shows the sales rank in the stage pianos category. Klicking on it gets you to the list - not that much complicated I think, so try yourself if you don’t trust the screenshot

Here is a link to Thomann's sales ranking for stage pianos, based on the UK shop: https://www.thomann.co.uk/cat_rank.html ... 77&gk=TASP

One can select a different shop, of course, e.g. France - same result: https://www.thomann.de/fr/cat_rank.html ... 77&gk=TASP

Cheers, m

Gambold wrote: ↑06 Sep 2024, 04:14Judging from this board, people are clinging to previous versions and the only Stage 4s you see are from in-house musicians sponsored by Clavia.

I think internet forums — which are literally vestiges from twenty years ago, and home mostly to people old enough to remember those days, AND who are either geeks with time to burn or who actually have issues with the hardware — are the WORST place to gauge real-world interest and experience.

Almost *nobody* who just happily buys a piece of kit and happily and efficiently uses it day-in, day-out will ever need or bother to visit a tech support forum, no matter how "community" it may feel.

The only reason I upgraded from the Stage 2 to the Stage 3 was that I'd sworn I'd upgrade *immediately* when they added drawbars to a Stage 2. I'd probably still be pretty happy with the Stage 2 otherwise — though I very much appreciate the improvements (particularly the synth and the seamless transitions). I still (seven years later) vaguely feel like the Stage 2 organ model did things for me that the Stage 3 does not, but it's close enough to work well, for a clone.

If they hadn't added drawbars, it probably wouldn't have compelled me to upgrade, though.

The Stage 4, however, being two generations down the line, after a decade of use, might well have.

The Stage 4 offers some very nice things over the Stage 3, but as long as the 3 does everything I need it to, I have more urgent things upon which to spend money and the considerable time I've invested into learning and programming this instrument.

If I were a sponsored artist or needed an additional board for some project (where the financial and time budget made sense), I'd opt for the Stage 4. If I had still been on the Stage 2, I'd probably have upgraded already.

> Just have a look at the very top of the screenshot - it clearly says „sales rank“ - haven’t you seen that?<

Of course, and I’m not disputing that data. I just pointed out that there is conflicting data on the same site…lists based on “popularity” and badges of “top sellers” that don’t include the Stage 4 in such a highly-placed position.

It’s also possible that “sales rank” is a dollar figure, and not a unit count. Since the Stage 4 is very expensive, it would logically place quite high on a list based on revenues.

Gambold wrote: ↑09 Sep 2024, 13:05 It’s also possible that “sales rank” is a dollar figure, and not a unit count. Since the Stage 4 is very expensive, it would logically place quite high on a list based on revenues.

That’s correct - why don’t you send them an email asking on which kind of numbers the ranking is based on, and share the answer here? The contact information is available on their webpage

@Gambold: I just had a quick chat with the customer service department of that dealer on another topic and asked them about the sales ranks, they confirmed that the sales rank is based on number of units sold, not on revenues ... sorry for destroying your attempts to finding the fly in the ointment (or "find the hair in the soup" as we say in Germany)

> sorry for destroying your attempts to finding the fly in the ointment<

An odd and incorrect read of the discussion.

I will contact them myself, per your suggestion, and try to get some actual data in print, and not just the hearsay of a phone chat presented to destroy my malicious motives.

Here ya go - it's a bit confusing, isn't it? I'm going to follow-up with the email they gave me at the end - that will likely take time for a response, but I will post it here when I get it.

Gambold wrote: ↑09 Sep 2024, 17:06 > sorry for destroying your attempts to finding the fly in the ointment<

An odd and incorrect read of the discussion.

I will contact them myself, per your suggestion, and try to get some actual data in print, and not just the hearsay of a phone chat presented to destroy my malicious motives.