Author |
Message |
sunless
Joined: May 08, 2004 Posts: 2 Location: Miami, FL
|
Posted: Sat May 08, 2004 10:06 am Post subject:
Potentially stupid question...G1 patches on G2 |
|
|
Hey, I'm new here...but am a long time Nord Modular G1 user.
I'm thinking about getting the G2 now that OSX functionality has been announced, but I have one question.
Will my old patches for the G1 work on the new G2? Is there a patch converter or are they still the same basic file extension?
Thanks a lot. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
ian-s
Joined: Apr 01, 2004 Posts: 2669 Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Audio files: 42
G2 patch files: 626
|
Posted: Sat May 08, 2004 2:27 pm Post subject:
g1 to g2 patch |
|
|
No backward compatibility for patch files. Even 'manual' copying is a problem because not all g1 modules currently implemented, or implemented in different ways. To many differences but from what I hear, the G2 is much better for creating new patches. I cant comment relatively as I never owned the G1 but there is a lot of thoughtful stuff in the G2 to improve workflow. For instance, you can swap some modules in place without having to repatch the connections. Other areas have been improved as well, checkout the manual. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
mosc
Site Admin
Joined: Jan 31, 2003 Posts: 18197 Location: Durham, NC
Audio files: 212
G2 patch files: 60
|
Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 6:28 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Welcome, Sunless from Miami.
People have talked about writing a patch converter program, but I don't ever expect to see it happen. Clavia isn't going to do it, it's safe to assume. Lot's of people are just repatching the old G1 patches on the G2. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Rob
Joined: Mar 29, 2004 Posts: 580 Location: The Hague/Netherlands/EC
G2 patch files: 109
|
Posted: Sun May 09, 2004 1:48 pm Post subject:
Re: g1 to g2 patch |
|
|
g2ian wrote: | No backward compatibility for patch files. |
The G2 is definitely based on the classic NM, but it is also quite a different instrument. On the patchlevel there is a new and imho improved approach to many techniques. The G2 is more structured, many new mixers and switches allow for a more flexible way of routing signals through a patch. I found that repatching old patches manually on the G2 can make them more flexible from a musical point of view.
At first I was worried about the lack of backward compatibility and not being able to convert old patches. But now I'm actually glad, simply as when repatching them they invariably improve. Personally I started to quickly use new features and modules, or solve puzzles in a different way which improved upon the musical possibilities of the patch. The G2 invites one to do so. On the classic NM many things needed to be done in obscure and indirect ways, only one example is the use of those grey signals. Those things are more easy to do on the G2 and in more transparent ways.
A patch converter should really be sort of an interpreter, guessing the purpose of an old patch and then build a new one in a more straightforward G2 way. And although I must have some faith in computers, as I've been using them for many years, I think that we ourselves are the best interpreter here, and that manual repatching will actually improve upon the old patches.
So my statement is: repatching by hand is actually rewarding. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
sunless
Joined: May 08, 2004 Posts: 2 Location: Miami, FL
|
Posted: Tue May 11, 2004 6:45 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Thanks a lot for the replies...I appreciate it.
It's kind of a bummer on one side, and totally fine on the other...I'm excited to learn all of the new modules for the G2...just wish I didn't have to throw out all of my patches...Sure, I could rewrite them all, but part of the point for me with the G1 was that I could build a huge library of my own sounds, just assuming I would be able to use it in the future. However, they never developed the OSX compatability, which I'm sure has been discussed here and I just don't feel like running an OS9 machine or a PC to only create patches...too much work...
The G1 was always fun because it was so quick and effortless.
However, I'm sure with all of the crazy new sounds I make in the G2, I won't even care about the old patches anymore.
I think if I were a synth manufacturer, I would want to create a timeless legend and not just consistent new products...for example in the software world: look at Native Instruments...they made some great stuff, then killed themselves on OS compatability and the "small details" of whether or not an application even worked...they don't support their old products at all and consistently release new ones. Nothing like paying to do someone's beta testing. Silly.
End rant now.
Thanks. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|