Clavia NordRack 2 User reviews -Page 16

Synth Site: Clavia: NordRack 2: User reviews Add review

One Click listings

Average rating: 4.0 out of 5

page 4 of 5: <<< 1 2 3 4 5 >>>

nrtx a part-time user from swedem writes:

to Jerry Kahn and dz:

Yes, of course the NL2/NR2 arent fat, thats whats made them so pop, the "razor thin" quality that really cuts. I also own a Virus B wich is VERY fat, it seems wider, deeper, plain fatter than the nord, but still i really like the sound of the nord 2, and wouldnt dream of selling it, not without replacing it with a modular anyway. Point is, these 2 very different VA soundcharacters complete one another very well in mixes.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Thursday-Mar-08-011 at 12:55

dz writes:

I agree with you, Jerry Kahn, fully. I owned Nord Rack 2 and I also have Pulse. I sold Nord after couple of months and bought *new* Micro Q. Quite amazing difference. Nord is just so expensive. You can read my "first impressions" if you look my early review. Nord has great interface (not comparable with Micro Q), just turn knobs -> no menus.

Rating: 3 out of 5 posted Thursday-Mar-08-011 at 07:15

Jerry Kahn a part-time user from NYC writes:

I got it on a trial basis. It sounded great, at first, definitely with lots of great musical possibilities, very accessible.

My only problem came when I started A-B-ing it to a true analog which I own-- a Pulse. The sound difference was just too startling.

The analog is, like, REALLY THERE, RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME, whereas the Nord was, like, "in a box, somewhere else"-- I cant really describe it better than that. Thats what fat is, I guess.

It seemed that if I put the Nord in monophonic mode it was a little better, but that sortof defeated the purpose. I also own a good reverb box-- a Lexicon PCM 91. Generally, I need to add reverb to the Pulse, but that the Nord sort of 'has it already' it seemed, built into the sounds for the most part so adding more wasn't helping the matter-- just made it muckier.

So I brought it back.

Bear in mind I am no expert, just go by the ears and some cursory tests.

I tried the Waldorf Q in the store, and I think it is a lot closer to the analog.

Rating: 3 out of 5 posted Wednesday-Mar-07-011 at 02:14

Patrick Fridh a professional user from Sweden writes:

It's a beautiful synthesizer in all aspects, and in fact... it is four separate synths, all of which are comparable to a Juno 106 combined with a DX7. All that for the little money the NR2, is like awesome if you think about it. You've even got drumkits in the thing! And we're not talking simple samples here. We're talking pure synthesis! :)

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Friday-Nov-10-000 at 11:22

DZ from Studio writes:

Just great raw sound. Easy to use. Sounds and filters are quite warm and smooth. Very similar sounding like AN1x, but both has their own strong points. I noticed that 'noise' is really good sounding. I agree who said that it's good that there is no internal reverb. I miss some rough distortion, flanger, phaser etc but there is 4 outputs. I like that sound is clean and dry, not messed with tons of effects (matter of taste). Unison mode can really fatten up some bass/lead but eats polyphony too, so it would be nice if there would be at least subosc out there. Again, no problem with me, I got other stuff doing those booming basses if needed and i still have full poly of Nord. Good job Swedish engineers, I should check Sidstation too (well Im going anyway).

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Friday-Nov-03-000 at 06:31

page 4 of 5: <<< 1 2 3 4 5 >>>

More Stories: