Author |
Message |
Venatt
Joined: Oct 01, 2009 Posts: 7 Location: El Paso TX
|
Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:59 pm Post subject:
Nord Lead 3 vs Nord Lead 2X |
|
|
I was wondering which synth is more powerful, the Nord Lead 3 or the Nord Lead 2X ?????
I have a Nord Lead 3 but I don't know if I should sell it to boy the Nord Lead 2X. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
fac
Joined: Dec 08, 2007 Posts: 162 Location: Mexico
G2 patch files: 1
|
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 6:10 am Post subject:
|
|
|
I have a NL3 and recently got an NR2x at work, but haven't used it much. To me, the NL3 is much more powerful: it has more polyphony, FM, pre and post-filter distortion, oscillator cross-modulations, filter FM, more filter types, including dual and comb filters, many more modulation routings, unison detune without polyphony stealing, note stacking, LFO's can be used as envelopes (in 1-cycle mode) and one of the envelopes can be looped. Also, the NL3 has the best interface ever, although the 2x interface is also very friendly.
The 2x sounds IMO more raw than the 3. The 3 sounds more polished and clean, but it can sound very thick and fat. I wouldn't ever trade mine for a 2x. _________________ My music: http://cdbaby.com/all/fac |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Wout Blommers
Joined: Sep 07, 2003 Posts: 4529 Location: The Hague - The Netherlands
Audio files: 123
G2 patch files: 12
|
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:51 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Do you agree the NL3 is much more complicated? The NL2X can do a lot, is much more intuitive to program.
At the other hand the NL3 hasn't had the exposure it deserves.
Let's do this now!
Wout |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
fac
Joined: Dec 08, 2007 Posts: 162 Location: Mexico
G2 patch files: 1
|
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:31 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Wout Blommers wrote: | Do you agree the NL3 is much more complicated? |
Not really. I find the NL3 one of the easiest synths to use, mainly thanks to its extremely well-designed interface. It certainly has more functions than the 2x, but everything's right there in the front panel, just like in the previous nord leads. If anything, the NL2x panel looks much more crammed. The bigger knobs on the NL3 make everything easier to read for me.
In any case, classic subtractive sounds are a breeze to program in both synths. But compare, for example, making 4-op FM patches on any Yamaha FM synth, against making them on the NL3. No contest. _________________ My music: http://cdbaby.com/all/fac |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Wout Blommers
Joined: Sep 07, 2003 Posts: 4529 Location: The Hague - The Netherlands
Audio files: 123
G2 patch files: 12
|
Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:01 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Well, Clavia still believes it is the best synth they ever made...
Wout |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
dorremifasol
Joined: Sep 28, 2006 Posts: 814 Location: Barcelona, Spain
Audio files: 7
G2 patch files: 49
|
Posted: Mon Oct 04, 2010 2:25 am Post subject:
|
|
|
There is only ONE thing I don't like about my Nord Rack 3 at all. The Glide sounds awful, stepped, not like the Nord Lead 2. Big FAIL for Clavia.
The envelopes sound nicer in the Nord Lead 2 too, IMHO. I had both once but I sold the 2 and kept the 3.
Now I'm searching for a really cheap Nord Rack 2 (not 2X). It sounds so "organic" _________________ Cheers,
Albert |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
zoomer
Joined: May 20, 2008 Posts: 5 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 3:37 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Wout Blommers wrote: | Well, Clavia still believes it is the best synth they ever made...
Wout |
Interesting. I found it was discontinued fairly quickly and I got the feeling it was an embarrassment to them. There are still bugs in the software they could have addressed. I really enjoy mine, even though it's subject to aliasing in high frequencies and the envelopes aren't quite as aggressive as I'd like. It could have used a final software upgrade, especially considering the great control interface. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
rnbw_six
Joined: Nov 16, 2010 Posts: 9 Location: USA
|
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:31 am Post subject:
|
|
|
The NL3 looks sexier and is more powerful on paper. But the 2x is the better synth, more straight forward, more solid sound, my opinion.
He had to of been talk about the Nord lead 2x when saying Clavia's best synth ever, after all they did make an anniversary model. Doubt that will happen for the NL3 but who knows. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Wout Blommers
Joined: Sep 07, 2003 Posts: 4529 Location: The Hague - The Netherlands
Audio files: 123
G2 patch files: 12
|
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2010 4:09 am Post subject:
|
|
|
The NordLead surely is Clavia's best known synth and after all it's 16 years in production at this moment. Still new items are produced. Their hit this year is the Electro 3 and the synth they sold the most, at least when being in production is the NortdModular Micro.
The troubles with the NordLead3 was soon after development the prodction of the DSP's stopped. Thanks Motorola
Wout |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
dorremifasol
Joined: Sep 28, 2006 Posts: 814 Location: Barcelona, Spain
Audio files: 7
G2 patch files: 49
|
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:05 am Post subject:
|
|
|
I would love to resking my Nord Rack 3 to make the panel colors look more like the Nord Wave. I'd also like to put wood side panels on it _________________ Cheers,
Albert |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Infra
Joined: Nov 14, 2010 Posts: 13 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2010 4:41 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Wout Blommers wrote: | Do you agree the NL3 is much more complicated?
Wout |
Have missed this topic
I don´t own a NL/NR2 but I have been working with them before as well as aother VA-synthersizers...
And of those I think with no doubt the NL3 is one of the easiest synth´s to edit
Compares with for example a virus which is quite complex as well, but can be a bitch to edit when diving into sub-menues. The NL3 on the other hand is more logic and easier to understand.
Same goes when comparing NL2 and NL3.
But... I guess its also just a matter of taste ?
just my 5 cents
// F |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Wout Blommers
Joined: Sep 07, 2003 Posts: 4529 Location: The Hague - The Netherlands
Audio files: 123
G2 patch files: 12
|
Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 12:55 am Post subject:
|
|
|
In some way the Lead3 has 'drop down' menu's too, using the [Shift+turning a knob] the knob becomes another function.
The 'strong point' on the Lead2 was the dedicated knob function all the time, which is not completely true, because FM also controls RingMod tuning. When designing the Lead2 a knob was missing
Anyway, the Lead2 is much more 'open' to understand and explore.
The synth for beginners!
Wout |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
NordGas
Joined: Nov 15, 2010 Posts: 13 Location: Australia
|
Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:41 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Wout Blommers wrote: | ...The troubles with the NordLead3 was soon after development the prodction of the DSP's stopped. Thanks Motorola
Wout |
Is that for sure? The story I heard was that the problem was ROHS compliance - the NL3 would have needed a full re-design to become ROHS compliant, so the product line was ended.
I'm sure there would be an alternative chip available that could replace the one used in the NL3. The first Virus Ti used the exact same chips as the NL3 (only it had 2 of them where the NL3 had 6) and the Virus Ti2 has continued with another processor (I think) so there must still be chips around that can do the job.
I wont comment on the sound of the NL3 yet - still in the "honeymoon" period. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Vader77
Joined: Nov 19, 2010 Posts: 40 Location: Death Star
|
Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2010 6:26 am Post subject:
|
|
|
I've read a lot of people still prefer the classic warmer sound of the 1&2 over the more clinical 3 which was touted as a more advanced subtractive than a dedicated virtual analogue hence the 2X
it's a shame the NL3's UI didn't make it to the current models however I heard the LED encoders contained lead of some sort making it none compliant with that new EU malarkey
this combined with the steep RRP next to better featured (on paper) competition like the Virus may have been it's downfall
am I right in thinking the NL3 has the same design algorithms as the G2 as that sounds very different to the G1? |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Wout Blommers
Joined: Sep 07, 2003 Posts: 4529 Location: The Hague - The Netherlands
Audio files: 123
G2 patch files: 12
|
Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2010 4:03 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Vader77 wrote: | ... am I right in thinking the NL3 has the same design algorithms as the G2 as that sounds very different to the G1? | I don't think so. But I do know the G1 is used to design the Lead3
Wout |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
(PK)
Joined: Jan 01, 2011 Posts: 1 Location: EU
|
Posted: Sun Jan 02, 2011 2:07 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Hello Nordfans
This is my first post, I've checked in here now and then for an idea of the Lead3 ownership and experiences. I'm a veteran in synths, something like 18 years, having played and owned a lot of synths including a few classics. Here's my dissertation on the 2/3 question..
I had a lead2 for many years, eventually selling it as I got 'real' analogs and other digital synths. A few years ago I got into the virus range, starting with a KC and then a Ti keyboard. Liked them very much - wonderful toolbox with the mod matrix which for example truly integrates the fx and/or arpeggiator with your patch. A blast! Soundquality-wise I always felt it was ..ok. A quite flat high-end and whether you tried to work it with the internal means (eq or simply tilting the balance with the filters) or using external hardware (good stuff), it didn't matter - you would get a strained and artificial result. Brighter but grainy and lifeless. If I needed high-end on a virus part, I dubbed it with other stuff - samples, other synths, guitars or what felt right. It's a shame as I think the viruses are quite nice otherwise.
Now. Here is what I think all Nords shine - overall they have a presence and vibrance in their sound, and especially in the high-end, that while nowhere near as natural as an acoustic instrument, still definitely leaves all other virtual analogs behind.
Aliasing? What kind, or rather where? In an audio dsp design, depending on what you ask of it, aliasing shows up in different parts and aspects of the processing. I'd like to hear an example and I'd be really interested in hearing another design that pulls off the same task cleaner or at least perceived as better. An all else equal comparison or in simpler language apples to apples. ;o)
As for the lead 2/3 differences.. The 2(x) to me is the digital Juno106 and then some - great sound, everything right in front of you. It might be modern and digital but unlike many other cases of dsp applied to music, it is a musical instrument.
I agree with some of the reservations regarding the 3. Although Clavia (initially) and many users would like to see it as a development or refinement of the 2, it's not ..quite. I think the 2 excels at standard/basic synth sounds and working with the slots/performance mode to layer things quite sophisticated stuff as well.
Tweaking up the same kind of timbres on a 3, to my ears it does'nt hit you the same. They sound more anonymous than on the 2.
Bah. It should, ought to, Clavia why the f*ck did you change that or this, that worked so well on the 2?
Anyway. In synthland, where the 2 ends, the 3 begins. Super hi-fi absolute walls of electronic nirvana. Chord memory, stacking, unison, fm.. I'll be happy to post some examples.
Maybe a thread with lead2, lead3 and wave 'greatest hits' would be nice? Where people can post stuff that the synths excel at. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Wout Blommers
Joined: Sep 07, 2003 Posts: 4529 Location: The Hague - The Netherlands
Audio files: 123
G2 patch files: 12
|
Posted: Sun Jan 02, 2011 10:42 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
(PK) (PK) wrote: | ... Clavia why the f*ck did you change that or this, that worked so well on the 2? | Keep in mind the two synths are developed by different designing teams. It's the way Clavia works. Quote: | Maybe a thread with lead2, lead3 and wave 'greatest hits' would be nice? Where people can post stuff that the synths excel at. | It's always nice to hear results. Could be inspirational.
Wout |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|