Same piano lib sounds completely different on E4, vs E6?
Posted: 19 Dec 2019, 10:24
Has anyone else done a thorough A/B of the 4 vs the 5/6 and found it to be a sonic step down?
There has long been only 2 gripes I've had since I bought my 4HP when it came out ~2013: no splits/layers and really limited piano/sample memory. But the action was a perfect mid-weight middle ground for Hammond and AC piano, and at that point Nord finally had their act together on the acoustic pianos, enough to rival some of the plugins, and the better flagships. I could finally leave the Kurz/Hammond/Leslie rig at home a little more!
Been happy with the 4HP as the daily main driver for years but at long last I figured with a couple of extra bux lying around it was time to upgrade my trusty old workhorse and go to the 6HP, get the splits and layers and maybe even leave the laptop home on some gigs.
It had to be the same but better, right?? I mean I'd used lots of E5/6/S2 etc in backline rigs over the last few years in passing, so I thought I knew.
Other than the stated feature expansions, the first thing I noticed was the action. A LOT tighter than the 4, and higher quality build and feel. The pianos felt meatier. Really nice. And I could finally load a bunch of them in with 1GB of space. .......But on the first gig, the organ wasnt as buttery - much tougher to rip across cause of the heavier action, and hey, I'm no Corey H. Hmmmm....
Then I spun the Leslie up in the in-ears and.... Wtf??? The horrible wubba-wubba motor-boating from the earlier series' (and nearly every other clone) was back from the dead! Where was the ya-ya-ya-ya pulse they got right in the 4? It was another main reason I felt safe leaving the 145 at home and going to Nord in the first place. Guess I didn't notice on the backline gigs, probably cause I was running in mono on stage.
But then the same old, trustworthy E1 and E2 pianos and the clav also felt and sounded.... Different. Less meat, less warmth, less bottom end. A bit lifeless in comparison.
So I hooked them both up at the same time to my studio monitors to A/B them. What a crazy difference! The same exact (5.3/5.4) Rhodes/wurl/clav Nord lib files sounded **completely** different, even when run dry, no filtering at all. The 4 sounded better almost across the board, with maybe the AC pianos as the exception. Richer, meatier, slightly louder signal at the outputs, too. The Twin amp-model wasn't even in the same galaxy. With some filtering and with the new "generic" drive setting, I could get the 6 sorta close, but not enough to be equally satisfying.
After all this, I brought my non-musical wife in to make sure it was as noticeable as I thought it was. She agreed.
So I'm thinking it's going back to the store. I didn't even bring it to gig #2. I don't know why Nord had to mess with such a good thing.
Anyway, interested in hearing from anyone else who's gone from 3 or 4 to 5/6.
There has long been only 2 gripes I've had since I bought my 4HP when it came out ~2013: no splits/layers and really limited piano/sample memory. But the action was a perfect mid-weight middle ground for Hammond and AC piano, and at that point Nord finally had their act together on the acoustic pianos, enough to rival some of the plugins, and the better flagships. I could finally leave the Kurz/Hammond/Leslie rig at home a little more!
Been happy with the 4HP as the daily main driver for years but at long last I figured with a couple of extra bux lying around it was time to upgrade my trusty old workhorse and go to the 6HP, get the splits and layers and maybe even leave the laptop home on some gigs.
It had to be the same but better, right?? I mean I'd used lots of E5/6/S2 etc in backline rigs over the last few years in passing, so I thought I knew.
Other than the stated feature expansions, the first thing I noticed was the action. A LOT tighter than the 4, and higher quality build and feel. The pianos felt meatier. Really nice. And I could finally load a bunch of them in with 1GB of space. .......But on the first gig, the organ wasnt as buttery - much tougher to rip across cause of the heavier action, and hey, I'm no Corey H. Hmmmm....
Then I spun the Leslie up in the in-ears and.... Wtf??? The horrible wubba-wubba motor-boating from the earlier series' (and nearly every other clone) was back from the dead! Where was the ya-ya-ya-ya pulse they got right in the 4? It was another main reason I felt safe leaving the 145 at home and going to Nord in the first place. Guess I didn't notice on the backline gigs, probably cause I was running in mono on stage.
But then the same old, trustworthy E1 and E2 pianos and the clav also felt and sounded.... Different. Less meat, less warmth, less bottom end. A bit lifeless in comparison.
So I hooked them both up at the same time to my studio monitors to A/B them. What a crazy difference! The same exact (5.3/5.4) Rhodes/wurl/clav Nord lib files sounded **completely** different, even when run dry, no filtering at all. The 4 sounded better almost across the board, with maybe the AC pianos as the exception. Richer, meatier, slightly louder signal at the outputs, too. The Twin amp-model wasn't even in the same galaxy. With some filtering and with the new "generic" drive setting, I could get the 6 sorta close, but not enough to be equally satisfying.
After all this, I brought my non-musical wife in to make sure it was as noticeable as I thought it was. She agreed.
So I'm thinking it's going back to the store. I didn't even bring it to gig #2. I don't know why Nord had to mess with such a good thing.
Anyway, interested in hearing from anyone else who's gone from 3 or 4 to 5/6.
