Nord Electro 4 D
2013-05-23 by Mark Pring
Thread
Nord Electro 4 D
Re: [newmellotrongroup] Nord Electro 4 D
2013-05-23 by Chris Dale
Pretty impressive overall.
I have a Rhodes, Hammond, Wurlitzer, Vox Continental etc. and these emulations are pretty close.
What I wonder about is the touch sensitivity. How incrementally dynamic is it compared to the real things?
I thought that Hammond was the most realistic. I imagine they spent the most time and money on getting that right.
I have to say though that I'm not impressed at all with the Chamberlin sounds. The Mellotron wasn't that great either.
This could be down to the demonstrator though, as I doubt he's ever played the real things, and wouldn't play them the way we'd expect to hear them anyway.
There were only two Chamberlin sounds that were recognizable and they sounded very muffled and twee. The 'big-ness' just wasn't there.
Still, this would be a wonderful live instrument.
I have a Rhodes, Hammond, Wurlitzer, Vox Continental etc. and these emulations are pretty close.
What I wonder about is the touch sensitivity. How incrementally dynamic is it compared to the real things?
I thought that Hammond was the most realistic. I imagine they spent the most time and money on getting that right.
I have to say though that I'm not impressed at all with the Chamberlin sounds. The Mellotron wasn't that great either.
This could be down to the demonstrator though, as I doubt he's ever played the real things, and wouldn't play them the way we'd expect to hear them anyway.
There were only two Chamberlin sounds that were recognizable and they sounded very muffled and twee. The 'big-ness' just wasn't there.
Still, this would be a wonderful live instrument.
Re: [newmellotrongroup] Nord Electro 4 D
2013-05-23 by Mark Pring
It is on my wishlist.
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android
From:
Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@gmail.com>;
To: <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>;
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Nord Electro 4 D
Sent: Thu, May 23, 2013 1:43:59 PM
To: <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>;
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Nord Electro 4 D
Sent: Thu, May 23, 2013 1:43:59 PM
Pretty impressive overall.
I have a Rhodes, Hammond, Wurlitzer, Vox Continental etc. and these emulations are pretty close.
What I wonder about is the touch sensitivity. How incrementally dynamic is it compared to the real things?
I thought that Hammond was the most realistic. I imagine they spent the most time and money on getting that right.
I have to say though that I'm not impressed at all with the Chamberlin sounds. The Mellotron wasn't that great either.
This could be down to the demonstrator though, as I doubt he's ever played the real things, and wouldn't play them the way we'd expect to hear them anyway.
There were only two Chamberlin sounds that were recognizable and they sounded very muffled and twee. The 'big-ness' just wasn't there.
Still, this would be a wonderful live instrument.
Re: [newmellotrongroup] Nord Electro 4 D
2013-05-24 by Mark Pring
I would agree about the mellotron and chamberlin sounds in as much as they didn't sound quite right but I also had the feeling that I could do lots of interesting things with them. I think I could replace a couple of my keyboards and possibly my piano with the 81 key weighted action version of this. Might have to wait a year or two.
Mark
From: Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@gmail.com>
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, 24 May 2013 1:43 AM
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Nord Electro 4 D
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, 24 May 2013 1:43 AM
Subject: Re: [newmellotrongroup] Nord Electro 4 D
Pretty impressive overall.
I have a Rhodes, Hammond, Wurlitzer, Vox Continental etc. and these emulations are pretty close.
What I wonder about is the touch sensitivity. How incrementally dynamic is it compared to the real things?
I thought that Hammond was the most realistic. I imagine they spent the most time and money on getting that right.
I have to say though that I'm not impressed at all with the Chamberlin sounds. The Mellotron wasn't that great either.
This could be down to the demonstrator though, as I doubt he's ever played the real things, and wouldn't play them the way we'd expect to hear them anyway.
There were only two Chamberlin sounds that were recognizable and they sounded very muffled and twee. The 'big-ness' just wasn't there.
Still, this would be a wonderful live instrument.
I have a Rhodes, Hammond, Wurlitzer, Vox Continental etc. and these emulations are pretty close.
What I wonder about is the touch sensitivity. How incrementally dynamic is it compared to the real things?
I thought that Hammond was the most realistic. I imagine they spent the most time and money on getting that right.
I have to say though that I'm not impressed at all with the Chamberlin sounds. The Mellotron wasn't that great either.
This could be down to the demonstrator though, as I doubt he's ever played the real things, and wouldn't play them the way we'd expect to hear them anyway.
There were only two Chamberlin sounds that were recognizable and they sounded very muffled and twee. The 'big-ness' just wasn't there.
Still, this would be a wonderful live instrument.
Re: Nord Electro 4 D
2013-05-24 by m400s851
Yes, Clavia messed with the tron and chamby sounds making them soulless and boring imho.
/Mattias P
#851 #116
/Mattias P
#851 #116
--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@...> wrote:
>
> Pretty impressive overall.
>
> I have a Rhodes, Hammond, Wurlitzer, Vox Continental etc. and these
> emulations are pretty close.
>
> What I wonder about is the touch sensitivity. How incrementally dynamic is
> it compared to the real things?
>
> I thought that Hammond was the most realistic. I imagine they spent the
> most time and money on getting that right.
>
> I have to say though that I'm not impressed at all with the Chamberlin
> sounds. The Mellotron wasn't that great either.
>
> This could be down to the demonstrator though, as I doubt he's ever played
> the real things, and wouldn't play them the way we'd expect to hear them
> anyway.
>
> There were only two Chamberlin sounds that were recognizable and they
> sounded very muffled and twee. The 'big-ness' just wasn't there.
>
> Still, this would be a wonderful live instrument.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 4:37 AM, Mark Pring <markpringnz@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiFlfU4v2aI
> >
> > The mellotron part starts at around 18 minutes.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: [newmellotrongroup] Re: Nord Electro 4 D
2013-05-24 by Mark Pring
Well I will load my own samples in which could be called many things but not soulless or boring.
Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android
From:
m400s851 <mattias.puttonen@gmail.com>;
To: <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>;
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: Nord Electro 4 D
Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 7:54:31 AM
To: <newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com>;
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: Nord Electro 4 D
Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 7:54:31 AM
Yes, Clavia messed with the tron and chamby sounds making them soulless and boring imho.
/Mattias P
#851 #116
--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@...> wrote:
>
> Pretty impressive overall.
>
> I have a Rhodes, Hammond, Wurlitzer, Vox Continental etc. and these
> emulations are pretty close.
>
> What I wonder about is the touch sensitivity. How incrementally dynamic is
> it compared to the real things?
>
> I thought that Hammond was the most realistic. I imagine they spent the
> most time and money on getting that right.
>
> I have to say though that I'm not impressed at all with the Chamberlin
> sounds. The Mellotron wasn't that great either.
>
> This could be down to the demonstrator though, as I doubt he's ever played
> the real things, and wouldn't play them the way we'd expect to hear them
> anyway.
>
> There were only two Chamberlin sounds that were recognizable and they
> sounded very muffled and twee. The 'big-ness' just wasn't there.
>
> Still, this would be a wonderful live instrument.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 4:37 AM, Mark Pring <markpringnz@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiFlfU4v2aI
> >
> > The mellotron part starts at around 18 minutes.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: Nord Electro 4 D
2013-05-24 by m400s851
Sounds like a better idea than using the stock sounds, again imho.
/Mattias P
/Mattias P
--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, Mark Pring <markpringnz@...> wrote:
>
> Well I will load my own samples in which could be called many things but not soulless or boring.
>
> Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android
>
RE: [newmellotrongroup] Re: Nord Electro 4 D
2013-05-24 by Tom Doncourt
I agree- the sounds are squashed and tampered with for the most part. Definitely not a problem with the source material or the instrument. I re-recorded Tron and Chamberlin sounds
back into the Nord but in mono to get the highest rate possible. I, personally, was very satisfied with the results. I did versions direct, amped , and with effects. I like the amped with effects best. Again it is a personal choice but the Nord sample architecture
can sound quite good under the right circumstance.
From: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com [newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of m400s851 [mattias.puttonen@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 3:54 AM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: Nord Electro 4 D
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 3:54 AM
To: newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [newmellotrongroup] Re: Nord Electro 4 D
Yes, Clavia messed with the tron and chamby sounds making them soulless and boring imho.
/Mattias P
#851 #116
--- In newmellotrongroup@yahoogroups.com, Chris Dale <unobtainiumkeys@...> wrote:
>
> Pretty impressive overall.
>
> I have a Rhodes, Hammond, Wurlitzer, Vox Continental etc. and these
> emulations are pretty close.
>
> What I wonder about is the touch sensitivity. How incrementally dynamic is
> it compared to the real things?
>
> I thought that Hammond was the most realistic. I imagine they spent the
> most time and money on getting that right.
>
> I have to say though that I'm not impressed at all with the Chamberlin
> sounds. The Mellotron wasn't that great either.
>
> This could be down to the demonstrator though, as I doubt he's ever played
> the real things, and wouldn't play them the way we'd expect to hear them
> anyway.
>
> There were only two Chamberlin sounds that were recognizable and they
> sounded very muffled and twee. The 'big-ness' just wasn't there.
>
> Still, this would be a wonderful live instrument.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 4:37 AM, Mark Pring <markpringnz@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiFlfU4v2aI
> >
> > The mellotron part starts at around 18 minutes.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
>