The DPBSD Project

I have developed a MIDI file that is something like what they use over at Purgatory Creek for the Digital Piano Shootout only much more laser-like in its diagnostic abilities.*

I've dubbed it THE DIGITAL PIANO BS DETECTOR or the DPBSD for short. It can be found here:

DPBSD Project Files @ MediaFire

Along with the MIDI test file you can find a readme file that explains what it does and how to use it. I also have all the MP3 DPBSD sound clips and pictures of the various analyses located there for your listening / viewing pleasure.

I've honed it as best I can, and it's pretty good at revealing the following behavior in whatever it's played on:**

================
= Test Listing =
================
In the order they appear in the MIDI file:
0. Max recording level
1. Pedal and other sympathetic resonance test
2. Key sympathetic resonance test
3. Silent replay test
4. Quick partial damping test
5. Late pedal partial damping test
6. Half pedaling test
7. Sample looping test
8. Sample stretching test
9. Sample layer switching test
10. Undampered transition test

I would very much appreciate any and all DPBSD MP3 analysis files - which entails playing the MIDI file on your DP (many DPs will play MIDI files directly, otherwise you would use a MIDI sequencer here), digitally recording the response in stereo (many DPs will record WAV or MP3 files directly, otherwise you would use an external digital recorder here), and then uploading the resulting MP3.

Please post or PM me if you are considering uploading an MP3 to the project and I'll help you through the process - also do peruse the readme file first for directions. (It's not terribly difficult to do, but it can be a bit fiddly if you've never done such things in the past - basically it's just turn off the reverb and record the hottest level you can without clipping.)

I and others can then help you interpret the results. Be warned however, we may sit around taking endless pot shots at your expensive shiny new DP!



Index of Relevant DPBSD Posts on Pianoworld

The DPBSD Test
General background
WAV vs MP3 analysis

Acoustica
Pianissimo

Apple
Garageband Piano

Casio
PX-3
PX-110
PX-330, PX-330

EastWest Quantum Leap
Bechstein D-280 Concert Grand
Bosendorfer 290 & Steinway D & Yamaha C7
Goliath Pianos: Fazioli F308 & Steinway B & PMI Bosendorfer 290

Fatar
Numa Piano

Galaxy
1929 German Baby Grand (Blüthner 150)
Vienna Grand & Steinway
Vintage D

Garritan
Steinway

Generalmusic
Promega3
pRP-800
RP-X Module

Ivory
Bosendorfer & Italian & Steinway & Yamaha

Kawai
CA63, CA63
CN33
MP5, MP5, MP5
MP6
MP10

Korg
Kronos
Microstation
SP-250
SV1

Kurzweil
PC3X - Standard Grand

Modartt
Pianoteq v3.6.0, K1 solo recording

Native Instruments
Alicia's Keys
Kontakt 4 Factory Grand Piano

Nord
Nord Piano

Reason
Steinway D Nicewood

Roland
FP-7F
HP-307, HP-307, HP-307 vs RD-700GXF
JUNO-Di
JV-1010
RD-700GXF
RD-700NX
RD-700NX
RD-700SX Superior Grand & X Ultimate
RP201
V-Piano, V-Piano
SN: Real vs. SN vs. Kawai UPHI, Yamaha AG vs. SN

Sampletekk
Seven Seas C7

Sound Magic
Imperial Grand 3D

TruePianos
Diamond v1.5.0

Vienna Symphonic Library
Vienna Imperial

Yamaha
AvantGrand N3
CLP-330, CLP-330
CLP-440 (& vs. P-155)
CLP-990
CP1 CF Grand, CP1 CF Grand
CP5 CF Grand, CP5 S6 Grand
CP50 (& vs. CP1/5)
CVP-505, CVP-505
DGX-640
Motif Rack ES Full Grand
Motif Rack XS
Motif XS8 Full Concert Grand
NP-30
NP-V60
NP-V80
P-80 Grand Piano
P-85
P-95
P-120
P-155, P-155
S90 XS Natural Grand S6
YDP-223

Misc.
Tomb of the Unknown (Yamaha) Studio
Windows Media Player



Begging Section

I'd really appreciate anyone contributing DPBSD MP3s of the following:

- Three brownie points for the LIMEX Vienna Grand Piano.
- Two brownie points for any "Galileo" DP that uses "iMotion™ Interpolation Synthesis".
- Yamaha AvantGrand N1.
- Yamaha CP1 - CF voice (for an updated review) and S6 voice (for a comparison review with the CP5)
- Roland RD-300NX - default SuperNATURAL piano with all resonance and sound effects enabled
- Roland FP-4F - default SuperNATURAL piano with all resonance and sound effects enabled
- Roland RD-700GXF (or RD-700GX with K-RD700GX1 SN expansion) SN10 Grand Piano4

Any other suggestions?

And if anyone wants to redo any of the older DPBSD MP3 files with the very latest MIDI file that would be cool too. I would definitely update the reviews based on the newer files. I would particularly appreciate a redo on anything currently v1.5 and below.



The DPBSD Honor Roll (MP3 donors)
11 anotherscott
10 pesk
7 setchman
3 Glenn NK
3 jve
2 ChrisA
2 CyberGene
2 EssBrace
2 octurn
2 VivatRudolphus
1 Alexank
1 bkmz
1 Derek Andrews
1 Goofball Jones
1 jef_citron
1 jens4711
1 JFP
1 Jumajazu
1 kawaian/mucci
1 kurtie
1 luisdent
1 M.Schreck
1 Martin C. Doege
1 Mawima
1 Melodialworks Music/Lawrence
1 mkhor
1 nan
1 NikkiPiano
1 pkdd
1 Qbert
1 reza
1 R0B
1 sandord
1 sdw91
1 Soren Jorvang
1 tinybox
1 Vincentimes
1 Voltara
1 Volusiano
1 voxpops
1 Yuri Pavlov
1 zaba19



Notes:
*This file is meant to be used as something of a spot-check for various instruments and sample sets, perhaps as a go/no-go test before considering a purchase, and is in no way exhaustive. While a more comprehensive file could be easily made, it would produce a larger result file that would require more labor and time to evaluate.

Readers should take these technology reviews for what they are, which is one aspect of the full digital piano. Sound technology is a large aspect, but there are other aspects that should be considered as well, such as whether it sounds similar to a particular physical piano (Steinway, Bosendorfer, Yamaha, etc.), how the keys feel and respond, price, the loudness and frequency response of any built in speakers / amplifiers, intuitiveness of the user interface, electrical interfaces (pedal inputs, audio outputs, USB, etc.), overall weight and physical robustness if it needs to be moved often, inclusion and quality of other voices, expensive cabinetry and other aesthetic issues, etc. Whatever you do, promise me you will never buy any musical instrument sight-unseen or merely on my or anyone else's say-so. Go out and play a bunch of them (bring some good headphones!) and see what suits you and your situation best. But do educate yourself as much as possible beforehand. Forewarned is forearmed.

**:
1. Sympathetic resonance is the sound produced by elements of an acoustic instrument that are indirectly excited. Examples here are unplayed piano strings with the sustain pedal depressed, or a snare drum sitting near a loud stage monitor. The sympathetic resonance of undamped piano strings can be subtle, but can add believability and richness to sampled or modeled pianos. Damper pedal sympathetic resonance is often simulated (or "modeled") with delay effects similar to short reverb, and when poorly implemented can cause strange buzzing or other annoying sounds or resonances. Better multi-layer sample sets use pedal down velocity samples to capture sympathetic resonance, with an equal number of layers captured with the pedal up and the pedal down being the norm. Modeled pianos usually have realistic pedal sympathetic resonance, particularly if the string models themselves are excited to create it. Note that somewhere between D6 and A6 is the highest key on a real piano to have a damper, so notes played above this point should not damp after pedal up or key up, and always resonate in sympathy to any notes played. In addition, "duplex scale" is the sympathetic resonance of the unplayed but harmonically related section of string that is located between the bridge and the hitch pin, or special resonant bars.

2. Except for the very highest notes, the strings of a real acoustic piano have individual dampers associated with each key on the keyboard. Imagine the scenario where one or more keys are either pressed slowly so that the notes aren't played, or are played normally but allowed to decay to silence. As long as the keys are held down the individual dampers associated with them remain lifted from their strings, and these strings are then able to resonate in sympathy with other notes that are played. There are many names for this, many of which I find confusing (a popular one is "string resonance" which is so generic as to be non-descriptive) so I call it "key sympathetic resonance." This effect is even more subtle than pedal sympathetic resonance.

3. When a key is pressed on a real acoustic piano, the hammer is flung at the string with a velocity proportional to how hard the key is pressed. If the key is pressed very lightly, the hammer velocity will be so low that it will not reach the string before falling back to rest, and no sound will be made. If a note is played normally, and if the pedal is held down so that the damper for that note is not allowed to fall, then replaying the key very lightly should not interrupt or disturb the continued ringing or decay of the note. Basically, this test swaps the two different ways one can lift the damper on a string that is playing, and does so in an overlapping manner so that the string should neither damp nor replay. Digital pianos often duplicate this behavior - I call this "silent replay".

4. The more mass a vibrating string has, the more difficult it is to quickly damp. Therefore the bass notes in particular on a real acoustic piano can be damped for a brief period of time but still retain some vibrational energy. This test employs the sustain pedal to apply two brief damps to a playing bass note. I call this behavior "quick partial damping".

5. When a played piano key is sustained via the damper pedal, normally the pedal is depressed before the key is lifted. But often (due to inexactness on the part of the player) the piano key is lifted a split second before the pedal is depressed. For bass notes on a real piano, the string should be partially damped at key-up, but then ring on at a reduced volume once the pedal is depressed, with the volume reduction directly proportional to the damping time (time between key-up and pedal down). This can be thought of as a variation of the quick partial damping test, but with more focus on playability. Digital pianos that don't support this feature may be more difficult to play, as they will likely be more sensitive to sustain pedal press / key lift timing. I call this behavior "late pedal partial damping".

6. Half pedaling refers to the response of an instrument that supports intermediate positions of the sustain pedal. Virtually all digital pianos respond to the sustain pedal being fully up or down, but many, like real acoustic pianos, undamp the strings more the farther the sustain pedal is depressed. Physically playing such an instrument requires a continuous pedal controller plugged into a keyboard that supports a continuous controller for the sustain pedal.

7. Sample looping refers to a form of individual sample compression, where the end of the sound sample is chopped off and replaced with a loop (short sound clip which is played over and over) with a decay envelope applied. Most digital piano sample sets are looped. Since the loop is cyclic in nature, it can't easily reproduce multiple strings slowly interbeating, harmonics with complex decay rates, longitudinal modes, etc. so there are timbre differences between the real decay and the looped decay. Sometimes a difference in pitch or stereo image is perceptible between the sample and the loop. The transition from sample playback to loop playback is usually crossfaded in order to make it less abrupt and obvious. The decay rate is often made faster than normal in an attempt to partially hide the looped sound, but this fast decay can itself sound unnatural. Loops may be highly processed to hide their cyclic nature, but this tends to make them sound unrealistically static and dull. Better looping is accomplished with a relatively long attack sample followed by a loop sufficiently long to support a realistically "phasey" string decay sound. The best looping is only done after the attack sample has significantly decayed in volume. Modeled instruments, because they don't rely on samples per se, should exhibit no looping.

8. Sample stretching is a form of sample memory space compression, where samples for certain notes are replaced with pitch stretched versions of samples from other nearby (usually adjacent) notes. Most digital piano sample sets are stretched. Mild stretching might use one note, say C4, stretched up one half step to play the note C#4, with the next real sample being D4, which is stretched up for D#4, and so on, which reduces sample memory requirements to roughly one-half of full sampling. More severe stretching might stretch a single sample up and down one half step, which would reduce sample memory to roughly one-third the size of full sampling. Stretching is often non-uniform across the keyboard, with the lowest and highest notes stretched more (i.e. fewer samples stretched over more notes). For instruments other than piano, stretching is often used to create higher and/or lower pitches than the actual instrument being sampled can physically produce. The problem with stretching is that there are tones in real acoustic instruments that are fixed (sympathetic strings, soundboard, resonant cavities, etc.) whose pitches are also stretched when the note is stretched, which can sound unnatural, particularly with excessive stretching. Better sample sets are not stretched, and may have terms like "all notes sampled" to indicate this. Note that a stretched sample set may still be multi-layer and/or looped. Modeled instruments, because they don't rely on samples per se, should exhibit no stretching.

9. If the desired Note (e.g. C4) is an index into a one dimensional sample set, then Velocity in a "multi-layered" instrument is a second index into what can be thought of as a two dimensional sample set. Multiple samples of the same note are recorded at different velocities to better capture the natural dynamics of the instrument, and one particular sample from this set is selected for playback based on how hard the note is played (velocity) on the keyboard. If there are three different velocity samples for a particular note, the sample set is called a "three layer" sample. Most digital piano sample sets are multi-layered. The amplitude of the sample being played back is scaled with velocity, which makes playing more dynamic and natural, and helps hide the transitions between layers. Layers are often further blended in various ways that partially or completely removes the layer switch timbre discontinuities. Note that a multi-layer sample set may still be looped and/or stretched. Single layer digital pianos may use variable filtering to approximate the change in timbre with velocity of a real piano, and by very definition should exhibit no layer switching (though the result is usually something of a mixed bag). When layers are employed to replicate distortion effects, such as in some sampled electric pianos, the layer switching may be very abrupt and obvious. Modeled instruments, because they don't rely on samples per se, should exhibit no layer switching.

10. The highest keys on a real piano have no damper mechanism. The decay time for these notes is so short that a damper probably wouldn't affect playing much, and undamped strings are sympathetic resonant elements that can add richness to the sound of other played notes. The transition point between dampered and undampered is somewhere between D6 and A6. So obviously notes played above this point should not damp at key up (and obviously the damper pedal should have no influence over these notes either). Almost all digital pianos mimic this behavior by not damping the note at key-up (but probably very few model the sympathetic resonance element).

Looping, stretching, too few velocity layers (and/or harsh layer switching), and fake-sounding or no pedal sympathetic resonance by very definition reduce the lush sound and rich variability of the originally sampled real piano. Not noticing these things initially is no guarantee that you won't be irritated by them in the future. And even if these crude sample compression techniques and cut corners aren't too obvious during normal playing, they can easily cause listener fatigue in the long term. This is something to consider, particularly if you are considering using a DP for primary practice. If you get tired of the sound because the sample set you've been listening to over and over was butchered down to 5% or less of it's original size, then you may find yourself MIDIing into a PC piano ROMpler, shopping for a new DP, or you (or your child) may even give up piano altogether. Good sound is inspiring; bad sound is discouraging. When you shop for a DP, I suggest you concentrate on those with the technically best sound you can afford, then narrow the choices based on the aesthetics of the sound, key feel, ease of use, etc.

Interesting dewster.

I read the readme file, now if I only understood half of it :-)

If I get a chance I'll play with this with my Yamaha P-80.

Nicely done Dewster.

I like the sustained "C"'s going up in octaves at the beginning.

This will be interesting.

Snazzy

Thanks! And glad y'all can see the files OK.

Like I said, a P-155 and PX-x30 would be great to add to this collection (as well as the P-80 Piano World, and the P-85 Snazz)!

But I would quite probably kill for a CP-1 CFIII sample donation... (come on Moose!)

Any suggestions on a better file host, or is mediafire acceptable?

Wow. The head huncho hanging out in our little section of the forum. (Well, his actually . . . !)

Frank - for some reason I thought you were only into acoustic pianos. Interesting that you have a Yamaha P-80!

And a Hammond XK-3 :-)

The dewster has indeed been busy, and using his super powers for good, not evil! Great to see.

This will be a very useful and interesting test file to use with various DP's and sample sets. Bravo!

Now my opinion of you has gone up even more!

(Don't tell anyone, but among other things, I'm an organist, although of the pipe organ variety!)

Yes, but, are there limitations requiring the cryptic file names? I for one one, would appreciate more descriptive file names.




Yes, but then the question would become (sung to the Ghostbusters Theme) "who you gonna kill . . .? "

Cool! I have an XK-1 home on approval, and I think it's a keeper.

Snazzy

I'm PMSL ....

Ha ha!


Knock yourself out with descriptive file names! Just don't write novels...

I just uploaded am MP3 file. It is a very small sample set, measured in MB not GB. It is a sample set (not a VST) that is stored as a bunch of .WAV files with names like dc#2.wav and Pedal.wav I think I can hear most of what you are talking about. I did this mostly to make sure I understand the process. I used the 1.3 version midi file.

Because this uses a sampler I can go in and look at exactly how this was done, filters, note stretching and so on. I think it should all be in the open But I've not yet looked

It is a sampled Yamaha, model unknown

You are free to change the filename to anything you like.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/1y0ylnjmdow/dp_bsd_yam_studio.mp3

dewster,

I have the 4 Ivory pianos uploaded to my mediafire account for now, although it sounds to me from your post that you'd like all these files in your mediafile folder. I'm not sure how to upload it to your account without your username and password but I'll upload them again if you'd like them in one place.

I did use version 1.3 of your MIDI file, recording each piano in Reaper with all eq and effects turned off. I chose the first preset listed from each for each piano so they were as follows:

Bosendorfer Imperial 10 --> dp_bsd_ivory_bosey.mp3
German Concert D 10 --> dp_bsd_ivory_steinway.mp3
Italian 10' Concert Grand --> dp_bsd_ivory_italian.mp3
Studio Grand 8 --> dp_bsd_ivory_yamaha.mp3

http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=5da74615b2837725c79b87b207592a1c0742218a332edd73a543906a5faff527

Sounds like a good project I'll try and get S90Xs and RD700GX files for you. And the CP1/5 of course if they ever show up .....

Hello setchman,

Thanks very much for the files! I renamed them to have the dp_bsd version number of v1.3, and uploaded them to the share folder.

I also updated the dp_bsd_readme.txt and removed the short reviews I had in there.

There is a new file in the share directory dp_bsd_reviews.txt that has all my reviews to date.

Your record levels are excellent! These samples in Ivory also sound quite excellent! The decays in particular are firmly in Pianoteq territory.


FILE NAME:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_ivory_bosey.mp3
PLAYED ON:
- Ivory Bosendorfer Imperial 10, recorded w/ Reaper.
PROS:
- Nice long decays, no looping.
- No stretching (all notes sampled).
- Good dynamic range (~40dB, vel=1:127).
- Good layer matching.
- 8 or more layers.
CONS:
- C9 sounds pretty weird.
- No sympathetic resonance (turned off?)
- No response to partial pedaling.
OTHER:
- Volume in MP3 file very good.

FILE NAME:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_ivory_italian.mp3
PLAYED ON:
- Ivory Italian 10' Concert Grand, recorded w/ Reaper.
PROS:
- Nice long decays, no looping.
- No stretching (all notes sampled).
- Good dynamic range (~39dB, vel=1:127).
- Good layer matching.
- Nice pedal up sound.
- 7 or more layers.
CONS:
- No sympathetic resonance (turned off?)
- No response to partial pedaling.
OTHER:
- Volume in MP3 file very good.

FILE NAME:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_ivory_steinway.mp3
PLAYED ON:
- Ivory German Concert D 10, recorded w/ Reaper.
PROS:
- Nice long decays, no looping.
- No stretching (all notes sampled).
- Good dynamic range (~40dB, vel=1:127).
- Good layer matching.
- 6 or more layers.
CONS:
- C8 and C9 have a strange phasey sound.
- No sympathetic resonance (turned off?)
- No response to partial pedaling.
OTHER:
- Volume in MP3 file very good.

FILE NAME:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_ivory_yamaha.mp3
PLAYED ON:
- Ivory Studio Grand 8, recorded w/ Reaper.
PROS:
- Nice long decays, no looping.
- No stretching (all notes sampled).
- Good dynamic range (~39dB, vel=1:127).
- Good layer matching.
- Nice pedal up and note-off sounds.
- 6 or more layers.
CONS:
- No sympathetic resonance (turned off?)
- No response to partial pedaling.
OTHER:
- Volume in MP3 file very good.

Hello ChrisA,

Thanks for the sample! I renamed the file to include the dp_bsd version number and uploaded it to the share directory.

Your recording level was fairly low, but otherwise the MP3 is fine.

FILE NAME:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_yam_studio.mp3
PLAYED ON:
- Unknown small sample set from unknown Yamaha piano.
PROS:
- Looped, but fairly well done.
- OK sympathetic resonance.
- 3 layer.
CONS:
- Rather rapid note decay.
- Poor dynamic range (~30dB, vel=1:127).
- Looping of higher notes fairly obvious.
- Obvious stretching going on of some sort.
- Abrupt layer switching.
- Does not respond to partial pedaling.
OTHER:
- Volume in MP3 file too low! (please try for -1dB peak)

dewster,

As you were checking out the Ivory files I just finished loading up the Garritan Steinway Professional MP3s. They're in the same folder.

I used the v1.3 file again to make 5 recordings of the 5 different microphone positions (Under Lid, Player, Close, Stage Side, Classic). Despite how some of them sound, I made sure there were no effects being applied. There is a lot of natural reverb in some of those mic positions.

http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=5da74615b2837725c79b87b207592a1c0742218a332edd73a543906a5faff527

Thanks for the new files setchman!

I uploaded only the close miked MP3 as that was the only one I tested.

The review file is now updated, which seems to kill direct links to it (sorry people, look in the directory for dp_bsd_reviews.txt).

The Gerritan Steinway sounds very nice! I did hear some strange sounds deep into the decay of the notes, however.

I'm getting better at seeing the layers with the spectral views in Adobe Audition - this sample set has 8. And, strangely, it looks like maybe two notes are stretched.

FILE NAME:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_garritan_steinway_pro_close.mp3
PLAYED ON:
- Garritan Steinway Professional.
PROS:
- Nice long decays, no looping.
- No real stretching (except for maybe a couple of notes).
- OK velocity switching.
- 8 layers (from spectral PAN view).
- Good dynamic range (~39dB, vel=1:127).
CONS:
- No sympathetic resonance (turned off?)
- No response to partial pedaling.
- No pedal or note-off sounds.
- Strange breathing sounds (FFT?) in note decays near noise floor.
OTHER:
- Volume in MP3 file very good.

Everyone, if you want the readme, MIDI, or reviews file, please go here:

http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=7ef2fd9c0f59e62824a64199ac7f73e562543888620acf74e91dc00c2f906379

and paw around. Every time I change a file and re-upload it, the old link dies. But it seems the directory link stays the same, so maybe we can live with that for a while. I know it's rather disorganized at the moment - if business picks up I'll deal with it as necessary.

If people are interested in what I'm looking for in terms of detecting layers, stretched notes, looping, etc. I put a few Adobe Audition screen grabs in there too.

For instance, stretching_spectral_phase_p120.jpg shows a spectral phase view of the stretch test (chromatic walk up the keyboard) of the Yamaha P120, where you can clearly see groups of three with identical phase - one sample is used to play all three consecutive notes.

In layers_spectral_phase_ivory_bosey.jpg you can see the spectral phase view of the velocity layer test (middle C from vel=1 thru 127, step=2) of the Ivory Bosendorfer, where you can clearly see 4 distinct groups of identical phase - so there are 4 velocity layers.

Sometimes the velocity layers show up better using the spectral pan view, and in layers_spectral_pan_garritan_steinway_pro_close.jpg you can see 8 distinct groups, hence 8 velocity layers in the Garritan Steinway sample.

Finally, in looping_spectral_pan_p120.jpg you can see the spectral pan view of a note on the Yamaha P120. It starts out rich in harmonics, then about 3 seconds into the decay (@ the cursor) it turns into something that sounds wobbly and lamer, the dreaded LOOP!

I upped an MP3 for my Yamaha P120 if anyone is interested.

FILE NAME:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_yamaha_p120.mp3
PLAYED ON:
- Yamaha P120, Echo MIA soundcard, recorded with Adobe Audition.
PROS:
- 3 layers (from spectral phase view).
- Sympathetic resonance.
- Responds to partial pedaling.
- Huge dynamic range (~68dB, vel=1:127).
CONS:
- Looped, most loops sound wobbly at first, weak at the end, loop starts 1 to 3 seconds in.
- Weak sympathetic resonance.
- Obvious stretching, every three notes over low & mid, every 6 notes high.
- Layer switching is rather abrupt.
OTHER:
- Layer switch @ vel=88 and 102.

I have a P155 and I see you mentioned you would like that one on your list.

I'll try and find some time to have a go at the weekend.

Gerry that would be great! I'd really like to see how it compares to our old P120.

Instructions are in the readme file. Basically turn off the reverb, record the stereo signal as hot as you can without clipping, 44.1kHz sampling rate, save as 192kbps CBR MP3. I'm only interested in the main piano sound.

Cool, doesn't sound too tricky for an old IT geek like me!!

Oh, and the MIDI tempo should be set to 120.

dewster, I'm glad to see that you are finally putting your obvious technical knowledge to good use.

Initially, from the thread title, I thought you were planning to build a new software-based DP running BSD, but obviously 'BS' refers to something quite different!

Perhaps you will consider an open-source digital piano as your next project?

Anyway, I cannot promise anything, but I'll look into playing back your MIDI file on some modern KAWAI DPs (some support recording to USB memory as MP3 directly), if I get a chance.

Cheers,
James
x

Perhaps someone will make a UNIX bug detector and call it the BSD BSD project..


No way, DP customers are too picky! I'm actually much more interested in alternative controllers coupled to non-MIDI, modeled sound sources.


Sounds good, and I look forward to it!

Rendering MIDI to MP3/wave on a USB stick would be a super valuable feature in a good (solo recording quality) DP.

If it turns out you need a place to store files, you can upload them to Piano World.

The uploader is not just for graphics.

http://www.pianoworld.com/Uploads/fileuploader2.html

That's the "142 megabytes dedicated exclusively to high-quality piano waveforms" S90XS, I presume? I'd love to have a shot at that!

And would the RD700GX sample be from the RD700GX1 SuperNATURAL piano kit plug-in board? The one with seamless this and seamless that (everything is seamless)? I'd be super interested in that!

I guess it goes without saying that I'll squeal like a little girl the second I get my hands on a CFIII sample from the CP1/5/50!

Though not really on topic here, I just wanted to mention that the Motif XS can do this. One of the firmware upgrades added this ability. Really, you are "recording" to a sample and then writing that to an attached USB device (flash drive or HD). It is a very quick and easy process.

Tony

I did some tidying up, made some directories and sub-directories for the MP3 samples. Also created an upload directory for people to use.

Honing my craft while awaiting the CP1 sample.

Added my JV-1010 Session piano this morning:

FILE NAME:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_roland_jv1010_session.mp3
PLAYED ON:
- Roland JV-1010 Session piano, Echo MIA soundcard, recorded with Adobe Audition.
PROS:
- 2 layers (from spectral phase view).
- Large dynamic range (~60dB, vel=1:127).
CONS:
- Looped, actual samples are 3.5 to 0.5 seconds (lo to hi) with 1 to 0.5 seconds of crossfade.
- Looping obnoxiously static, decay tails sound organ-like.
- Stretching fairly obvious, stretch distances: 11,4,4,6,6,5,5,4,4,3,5,4,4,5,5,13.
- Layer switching fairly abrupt, switch @ vel=79.
- No sympathetic resonance.
- No response to partial pedaling.
OTHER:
- Anemic analog output w/ high noise floor.
- Fairly good for its time, now very dated.
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-05

One interesting thing about the output from this analysis is that it allows you to estimate the size of the physical memory required to hold the sample. Let's do this exercise for the Roland JV-1010 Session piano:

2 velocity layers * 16 actual samples / layer (number of stretch groups) * 2 sec / sample (rough average) * 44,100 samples / sec (sample rate) * 2 bytes / sample (assume 16 bit PCM) = 5,644,800 bytes.

5.7 MB.

Pretty freakin' tiny. You could put 175 of these sample sets on a 1 GB flash stick! Itself pretty tiny these days - the smallest I see for sale is 2 GB for ~$8. And at that rate, storage for the Session piano sample set would cost $4 / 175 = ~2 cents!

It's easy to understand why they played these games in the bad old days when ROM was expensive. Stretching in this case reduces the memory requirements by a factor of 88 / 16 = 5.5. Looping, assuming an average of 30 seconds is needed to fully capture a piano note, in this case reduces the memory requirements by a factor of 30 / 2 = 15. And 5.5 * 15 = 82.5 is a pretty whoppingly large factor to reduce the physical memory. Still, two fully unstretched and unlooped two-layer sample sets could fit on a 1 GB flash stick! A single four-layer sample set could fit on there too and would sound pretty fantastic in comparison.

I know the JV-1010 is really dated, but it's specs aren't that much different from the Yamaha P-120 (also out-of-production, granted, but less dated). These days I can see maybe playing these memory reduction games in a toy, but not in anything serious people pay serious money for.

With any luck we'll be leaving these bad-old-days behind us soon.

I'm redoing this post with PICTURES!

If people are interested in how I'm detecting layers, stretched notes, looping, etc. from the test file here are a few Adobe Audition screen grabs of the resulting MP3s:


The image above shows a spectral phase view of the stretch test (chromatic walk up the keyboard) of the Yamaha P120, where you can clearly see groups of three with identical phase - which means one sample is used to play all three consecutive notes within the group. As you might imagine, you can easily hear most of the transitions between groups.


Here you can see the spectral phase view of the velocity layer test (middle C from vel=1 thru 127, step=2) of the Ivory Bosendorfer, where you can clearly see 4 distinct groups of identical phase - so there are 4 velocity layers (at least for middle C).


Sometimes the velocity layers show up better using the spectral pan view, and in the above image you can see 8 distinct groups, hence 8 velocity layers in the Garritan Steinway sample.


In the above image you can see the spectral pan view of a note on the Yamaha P120. It starts out rich in harmonics, then about 3 seconds into the decay (@ the cursor) it turns into something that sounds wobbly and lamer - the dreaded LOOP! If you really think about it (and squint a lot ) you might be able to see the crossfade from sample to loop.


Finally, here is a clearer view of sample, crossfade, and looping on the Roland JV-1010, where looping is particularly egregious. The pure sample plays up to the cursor, the crossfade starts at the cursor and continues until the spectral view becomes largely constant approximately 1 second later - whereupon the crossfade ends and the pure, boring, organ-sounding looping is the only thing you hear, until either the key is lifted, or the loop hits the noise floor, or you go insane.

The sample itself is only 2 measly seconds long! And it's stretched over multiple notes! And I payed good money for this box, mainly for the Session piano patch! Granted, it was a while ago, but still...

Wow. You sure have been working at this project. As a "visual learner" I certainly find the graphics interesting and useful. I continue to follow this project, and am also particularly interested in the results for certain pianos.

Lawrence

I think I see a flaw in your system. You are not checking for how the sample sounds.

What if some one were to sample a $200 Craigslist upright that was not even in tune and has broken strings in a noisy environment using a Chinese knock off Shure SM58 mic. But he had tons of free time so he records all 88 notes with 128 velocity layers with each sample going for 5 full minutes and ends up wit a 10TB of samples.

I think your analyssi method would rate such a sample set as "the world's best".

Or for that matter what if I played you MIDI file on my very old FM synth based keyboard? I'm gussing you's score the old synthvery high, it never loops (or always loops depending on how you think about it) the velocity is handled with a continues filter, no steps and there is no note stretching. I think it would pass with 100%

But in both cases if yu tried to play music the over-sampled clunker and the Fm synth would both sound horrible.


I think we are seeing some of this effect already. I agree with your analysis of the Yamaha MP3 I sent in. You are saying (I think) that it is roughly as good as your P120. The sample is one dozen or so "free" pianos that come with Apples "Logic". And if you listen it sounds arguably much better than a P120.

Things like microphone placement and quality may matter more then the number of dynamic samples

So,... maybe you should include a midi file with a "best of" Beethoven exerts.. It would be fun to organize a blind listening test and see if the results match up to technical tests

First off, I must say I'm pretty impressed with this initiative by Dewster. I was wondering how he was able to tell apart all those things by ear, then the visual graphs blew me away, showing such a real clever, smart lad.

But I think ChrisA brought up a good point. I was wondering myself that the result of any modelled sound should be passing with flying colors according to the test parameters, because this test is sample-sound oriented, and modelled sounds don't have those same limitations, do they?

I understand why you'd want to remove the subjectivity part by coming up with such a technical test like this, but then all it will tell you is how detailed the sound was sampled and how much corners were (or were not) cut to get the final results. But you can't say much about the quality of the contents inside the waveforms, because that's the big subjective part that you want to cut out.

dewster,

I have a couple of Galaxy II pianos for you're listening pleasure but I still can't upload them directly to the new folder you created. From "my side" of your account I do not see any upload button like I have when I'm logged into my own account. I see the folder there but no way to upload it.

If you want the files they are in my folder where the others are. They are the Galaxy II Steinway and Vienna Grand Download Editions, hence the DE in the file names.

I'm not trying to pile on here, dewster, but with the vast knowledge of music here, classical or otherwise, it wouldn't take much to come up with a few suggestions for simple pieces of music or excerpts (for the sake of brevity) that you could incorporate into your test. (Have you heard this somewhere before? )

I think it would be very interesting to find out if the pianos that look so good "on paper" are actually the ones that we prefer listening to.

ChrisA, very good points! And no offense, but let me address them:


Well, people can generally go to Purgatory Creek for that. I'm not really that interested whether it sounds like a Steinway or not if the sample is only 2 layers / stretched like crazy / 2 second looped samples / 5 MB - by very definition that can't sound very good. If they put a ton of work into it and play a billion notes at once it might sound amazing for a 5 MB sample, but that's probably the best thing you'll be able say about it. The rest of the time you'll be wincing and wondering why it sounds like crap in a solo recording.

Look at it this way: say someone is telling you that they have the most amazing digital picture of something incredibly detailed, but the picture size is only 50 KB. Without even looking at it you can tell right off that you probably won't be very impressed. If it's a 4 MB file you'll probably stop thinking about technical issues and take a look. Same thing.


It would sound like an incredibly detailed sample of a POS, something you can't do with a 5MB sample no matter how hard you try. We're talking detail here. Once the ability to reproduce detail hurdle has been passed, then I start caring about tone. Before that, I don't really care, by very definition it's not a serious instrument, it's a toy.


This is more of a go / no go test for crap compression issues with the sample set, not a BUY IT NOW! test. People should know how much sample they're actually getting IMO as up till now at least it has been a huge determinant in terms of sound quality.

And a single layer in a sampled DP is usually a bad thing, and I would put it in the CON column.


I went back and looked at your sample again yesterday (I'm slowly figuring this out), let's compare them again:

------------------------------------------------------
- Unknown small sample set from unknown Yamaha piano -
------------------------------------------------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_yam_studio.mp3
- Unknown setup.
PROS:
- Looped, but fairly well done.
- OK sympathetic resonance.
- 2 layers with some kind of filter? (from spectral phase view).
CONS:
- Rather rapid note decay.
- Poor dynamic range (~30dB, vel=1:127).
- Looping of higher notes fairly obvious.
- See evidence of at least 2 note stretching.
- Abrupt layer switching.
- Does not respond to partial pedaling.
OTHER:
- Volume in MP3 file too low! (please try for -1dB peak)
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-04

----------------
- Yamaha P-120 -
----------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_yamaha_p120.mp3
- Echo MIA soundcard, Sonar 6, Adobe Audition.
PROS:
- 3 layers (from spectral phase view).
- Sympathetic resonance.
- Responds to partial pedaling.
- Huge dynamic range (~68dB, vel=1:127).
CONS:
- Looped, most loops sound wobbly at first, weak at the end.
- Weak sympathetic resonance.
- Obvious stretching.
- Layer switching is rather abrupt.
OTHER:
- Samples are 3.5 to 1 seconds (lo to hi) with 1 to 0.5 seconds of crossfade.
- Stretch distances: 8,3(x25),5 = 31 groups.
- Layer switch @ vel=88 and 102.
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-04


So the free Apple piano is probably a 2 layer (w/ filter?) with rapid note decay, poor dynamic range, and doesn't respond to partial pedaling. This exercise isn't necessarily to pit one DP against another, but more to expose what is going on in each. That said, the P120 definitely has better specs, and sounds better to me (IMO). And in this case I don't believe that's a coincidence.

Thanks setchman! I snagged the files and will analyze them and upload them to the archive tomorrow. I can log out and still upload to my folder, so I'm not sure what's going on. Others are having the same problem, so it's not just you. I guess as long as people can post them somewhere where I can get at them that's the main thing.


I hear you, and do agree. But you can post samples to Purgatory Creek for sound issues, I guess I'm more interested in what's holding the vast majority of DPs back from being serious instruments at this point than what they sound like. Hopefully soon that will be just the opposite.

I hope I addressed this concern somewhat above - the more layers the merrier in a sampled DP; no layers are the norm for a modeled DP - and both should be judged from that perspective. I did test the TruePianos demo, a supposed sample / model hybrid. It had weird phasey stereo issues in the decay and obvious stretching. Any approach can sound either good or bad, particularly individual notes.


This isn't an attempt to remove subjectivity of sound in any way. It's more of an exercise in cutting though the hype - a test to see if it is even possible for a given DP to sound good. Up close most of them look and sound fairly ugly.

Most of the PC-based samplers & modelers I've tested so far I would be very happy to have in a DP.

Those certain pianos wouldn't by any chance have a "CP" in the model name, would they?

Hey, thanks for the explanation, Dewster. I understand better where you're coming from on all this now.

Very cool. I should put my YPG-635 to the test.. I wonder how quickly the looping starts on it. Interested in seeing some results for the RD-700GX too

This could be a brilliant resource. If used in conjunction with Purgatory Creek (for subjective analysis), you could make better informed purchase decisions.

If someone would give me an idiots guide (and I really do mean idiot), I would do something with my V-Piano so you could compare the behaviour of a fully modelled instrument. Presumably this is still layered but limited by the technical operating spec of MIDI, ie, 127 layers?

For info I use a Macbook Pro and do have a USB flash drive device if needed so tell me what to do and I'll have a go with the V.

Thanks Dewster for taking the time to create this level of insight for us all.

Steve

dewster - I've been following and immensely enjoying the thread. When time permits (i.e. when Larry turns me loose from the next PB issue) I'll record and UL the AG N2 and the massively sampled Vienna Imperial.

Great job!

Thanks for the encouragement!

OK, I will consider adding a small musical section to the test file.

My problem is I don't exactly know what to put in there, and can't grab random MIDI from the web without possible copyright issues and such.

I'm thinking ideally:
- It shouldn't be longer than maybe 30 seconds (don't want to extend the test too much).
- It should be dynamic (low, mid, and high velocity sections, not necessarily in that order).
- It should cover most of the keyboard note range one way or another.

Anyone have any ideas? I'm willing to listen to any MIDI or MP3 files you might want to direct me to or send my way.

dewster,

I just uploaded the first piano preset "Full Concert Grand" from the Yamaha Motif XS8. It will be interesting to see, as you get more Yamaha DPs, how Yamaha changes their sampled CFIIIS for the various DPs.

http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=5da74615b2837725c79b87b207592a1c0742218a332edd73a543906a5faff527

You should feel encouraged! A great response to your project!

A generic MIDI file won't work, in terms of assessing quality, especially if your goal is to compare pianos. The velocities will be inconsistent from piano to piano. That's one of the big problems with purgatory. Each instrument (DP or samples) needs to be played, to create its own unique MIDI file - to be used effectively only to play back the DP or sample in question.

I do agree with you Lawrence. Some MIDI velocity shifting / scaling should have been applied to many of the samples over there.

But there probably isn't a lot of harm in adding some short musical snippet to the end of the DPBSD file, particularly if it is kept fairly short.

Hi setchman,

I reviewed them today and uploaded your MP3 files to the archive. The Steinway in particular is very nice! Not sure what's going on with the partial pedal in both, very odd.

Also, I seem to be running across a fair amount of sound files that I can't do any spectral analysis on at all. It's either a bug in Audition, or extensive phase processing of the sample set (I have suspected the latter even before seeing this issue as it makes sense). Here is a picture:



Makes my job a lot harder. The Vienna Grand was one of these strange phase files, the Steinway was not.


---------------------------------------------
- Galaxy II Vienna Grand (download edition) -
---------------------------------------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_galaxy2DE_viennagrand.mp3
PROS:
- Nice long decays, no looping.
- Wide dynamic range (~53.5dB, vel=1:127).
- 7 or 8 velocity layers (from waveform view).
- Fairly good layer matching.
- Some kind of sympathetic resonance going on.
CONS:
- Obviously stretched.
- Stretch distances: 2(x17),4,2(x7),3,2(x10),3,2(x5) = 41 groups.
- No key-up or pedal samples.
- C9 sounds pretty weird.
- No response to partial pedaling.
- Bizarre partial pedal event: pedal 50%=>75% note sounds before being played!
OTHER:
- Linear phase (?) prevents spectral inspection.
- Volume in MP3 file very good.
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-06



-----------------------------------------
- Galaxy II Steinway (download edition) -
-----------------------------------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_galaxy2DE_steinway.mp3
PROS:
- Nice long decays, no looping.
- Wide dynamic range (~46dB, vel=1:127).
- Fairly good velocity layer matching.
- 8 velocity layers.
- Velocity switch @ vel=45, 52, 70, 80, 90, 102, 112.
- Very nice sympathetic resonance.
CONS:
- C2 sample just abruptly ends.
- No key-up or pedal samples.
- Obviously stretched (spectral phase view).
- Stretch distances: 2(x44) = 44 groups.
- No response to partial pedaling.
- Bizarre partial pedal event: pedal 50%=>75% note sounds before being played!
- A bit of strangeness near the noise floor.
OTHER:
- Volume in MP3 file very good.
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-06

Incoming:

-------------------------------
- Yamaha YDP223 Grand Piano 1 -
-------------------------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_yamaha_ydp223_gp1.mp3
PROS:
- Long note decay.
- Looping isn't too obnoxious.
- Huge dynamic range (~65dB, vel=1:127).
- I believe this is a very smoothly blended 3 layer sample set (spectral pan display).
- Layer switch (?, switch not audible) @ vel=80, 94.
- Responds to partial pedaling.
CONS:
- Obviously looped.
- Lower looping rather realistically wobbly, higher looping unrealistically static.
- Samples are 3 to 1 seconds (lo to hi) with 1 to 0.5 seconds of crossfade.
- Obviously stretched, group transistions farily audible.
- Stretch distances: 2,3(x28),2 = 30 groups.
- No real variation in timbre at higher velocities.
- No obvious sympathetic resonance, though there are subtle differences w/ pedal down
- No key-up or pedal samples.
OTHER:
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-06

Just reviewed it and archived the MP3.

Not very impressive, particularly for a newish instrument currently selling for $3.6k. The decay times are fairly short. Otherwise typical sample times, layers, stretching, symp res, etc. for Yamaha (and by that I mean typically mediocre). The P-120 tests better, which is rather shocking.

---------------------------------------
- Yamaha Motif XS8 Full Concert Grand -
---------------------------------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_Yamaha_MotifXS8_FullConcertGrand.mp3
PROS:
- Looping isn't too obnoxious @ lows & mids.
- Decent dynamic range (~33dB, vel=1:127).
- 3 layer sample set (waveform & spectral phase displays).
- Layer switch @ vel=70, 106.
- Sympathetic resonance, though it's fairly fake sounding - echoy and reverby.
- Key-up samples of some sort, though it sounds like a strange tone.
- Responds to partial pedaling.
CONS:
- Fairly quick note decay with some buzzing near the noise floor (could be a recording issue).
- Obviously looped.
- Samples are 3 to 1 seconds (lo to hi) with 1.5 to 0.5 seconds of crossfade.
- Lower & mid looping rather realistically wobbly, highs unrealistically loopy.
- Obviously stretched, group transitions fairly audible.
- Stretch distances: 2,3(x10),2,3,4,3,3,4,2,4,2,3,1,2,1,2,3(x5),5 = 31 groups.
- Obvious velocity layer switching, some kind of filter switch as well @ v=50.
- No pedal samples.
OTHER:
- Volume in MP3 file very good, though dynamic range seems like it may be limited.
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-06

If someone out there could run the DPBSD MIDI file thru their Korg SP250 and/or LP350 maybe we could resolve once and for all whether the sample sets are the same or not.

If the file is going to include the use of the hold/damper pedal, again, it will not translate from piano to piano. I know that in the (bad) old days, I would record (MIDI) a piece using one sample, and then try and play it back at a later date with a new and improved sample. Yikes. I remember often having to edit velocities like crazy AND changing the timing of ped ON and OFF messages. Not fun.

In my old age, now, I simply record again. Way better than doing a ton of editing. (I even dislike a bit of editing now). Of course, sometimes the original version was an improvisation, and "spot on" and it's difficult to replicate the magic. (Magic. Part of what made the improv so good in the first place).

Lawrence

I've been in the MIDI controller 64 time nudge hell myself, so I know from whence you cometh, Lawrence.

Sonar has pretty good MIDI filters though, so you just select them all, drive them high or low, and pull them back a bit. The continuous damper controllers are the worst IMO.

Very interesting test (and much work I suspect - my hat's off to Dewster for undertaking this gigantic project - it will be very useful to we DP types).

In regard to Pianoteq and dynamics - Dynamics are adjustable.

If a midi file has a large dynamic range, lowering the setting will reduce the overall dynamic range when the file is rendered to wave. Rendering means Pianoteq converts a previously recorded midi file to a wave file (takes much less time than playing and recording). An advantage of this is that even if the max peak is -30dB in the rendered wave, it can be maxed with no loss in sound quality (the soundcard is not used).

There is also a Limiter which is used to prevent clipping when the output hits the ceiling.

Glenn

Hmmmm... Can you successfully "play" these files in Audition? Maybe the MP3 decoder used by Audition fails? You could try converting the MP3 to WAV externally and then load the WAV file into Audition. You could also try the demo version of iZotope RX. I'm using that myself sometimes for spectrum stuff...

Love the DP BSD project, btw! Can't wait to see Kawai, Roland and Yamaha CP1 results...

Do you want a Kawai MP-5 sample?

If so, I will try to find time to send one, tomorrow (Aussie time)
If you already have one, ignore this post

Rob

I use MIDI to wave rendering a lot in Pianoteq, one of it's best features IMO. Another advantage of this feature is you never get glitches or lost notes on older PCs. Being non-real-time, it's free to take as much or as little real CPU time as necessary to get the job done.

Yeah, they play fine, and the waveform view works fine as well. For these types of files I have to rely heavily on envelopes and my ear to detect stretch and layer groups.

I've only seen this collapsed phase anomaly in PC samplers so far, not in real DPs. Two of the MP3 files I made myself in Audition, one I received from a poster. Here is the list:

- Galaxy II Vienna Grand (download edition)
- VintAudio C7 Close Miked 6 layer
- Windows Media Player

OK, I just went back and re-recorded the Windows Media Player piano *ugh* through my Echo Mia soundcard (SPDIF I/O) and the collapsed phase anomaly exists in the wave file before conversion to MP3. So it seems almost certainly something that exists in the sample set.

Extensive phase processing may help blending, particularly for subtle things like sympathetic resonance of multiple pedal down notes playing together. It could help with velocity layer blending too but, outside of the Yamaha YDP223 so far, I don't see evidence of anyone doing that.

Bring it on!

It will be interesting to see what different manufacturers do.

I'm looking at the V-Piano manual, and it will definitely play an SMF (Standard MIDI File) on a USB flash drive plugged into the front USB connector. The instructions starting on page 64 in the manual are pretty clear on how to do that.

http://www.roland.com/products/en/_support/om.cfm?PRODUCT=V-PIANO

Download the dp_bsd_v1.3.mid file from my share directory at mediafire, copy the file to your USB flash drive, then plug the flash drive into the V-Piano. Navigate to it in the V-Piano, set the tempo to 120, and see if it plays OK. Please turn off the reverb as it makes analysis more difficult.

However, I don't see a way to record to wave or MP3 (you can play these files on the V-Piano, but probably not record them). The manual discusses ways to record and save songs but I assume these are MIDI files (?) - which aren't useful for this case.

So I think you will need to run line-out from the V-Piano to your PC, and record it there. The S/PDIF connector is the best as there is no digital/analog/digital conversion going on, but use the analog line level outputs (outputs A) if you can't easily connect S/PDIF to your PC. If connecting analog, try to get as hot a signal as you can without clipping. For the file you are recording to, specify 44.1kHz sample rate, stereo, and either 16bit PCM (good) or 32 bit float (best). After recording, save as a 192kbps CBR (Constant Bit Rate) MP3 file. If you can't save as MP3, save as a *.wav file and I can probably convert it for you.

Then put the output file somewhere that I can get at it (if necessary, create a mediafire account, it is super easy).

You should be able to play the MIDI file on the V-piano simply by copying the file onto a USB thmb drive. Try the just to see if it plays. Get that to work first.

OK you've solved half the problem. Next comes recording the sound to the computer. The intrnal sound in the MBP is good enough. You will need a cable. Use a fiber optic S/PIF if you can otherwise you will have to use "Line In".

The Mac uses a special 3.5mm round SPDIF connector. The normal cone is square. You can buy a S/PIDIF cable with the right ends but a square to round adaptor cost under $5 and will let you use a standard and cheap optical cable.

Line in uses the same 3.5mm jack (It is a combo optical/electric jack) Yu need a 3.5mm TRS splitter cable to takes the stereo jack into two mono cables. Then you connect these to the left and right line outs on the Roland. Either draw a diagram of what you need and look for the parts are Sam Ash or Guitar center (both have a good selection of cables) or call Sweetwater and just tell them what equipment you have and what you want to do.

Once you have the cables plugges in recording audio is easy. Inside GarageBand make a real instrument track, asign the input to it, click "record" then start the v-piano playing. Later you can highlight the silence in the track and click "delete. then save the file

I assume you have Garage Band on the Mac.

Ok guys, thanks. I'll see what I can do tomorrow. Steve

dewster, check you pm.

I just uploaded a Yamaha P155 recording.

One more technical suggestion for the next version of the MIDI file. I had some trouble setting the recording level. I thought I had it set right and then later far into the track I noticed clipping so I had to re-record. So the suggestion is to add something that near the front, maybe a simple chord progression that could be used for settig the level. It should be the loudest part of the file. You could set the velocity to 127 but you'd have to guess which notes have the loudest sound, I'd guess the bass. or cords with the damper pedal down.

I used Garage Band to make this. Left everything at it's default setting and the only equipment I use was a cable to plug the P155 directly into the line-in in the Mac. GB wants to "normalize" the volume on any MP3 file it exports. But all this really does it set a constant in the MP3 file header.

The file is at BSD_1.3_P155.mp3

Hi Dewster,

Kawai MP-5 is here:

http://www.box.net/shared/oc1cxg9pmz

Excellent suggestion!

Yes, that is a good idea to put the highest level up-front in the recording.

ChrisA, I took a quick look at the P155 and I must say that Yamaha is doing a very good job of blending their velocity layers, I can't hear or see them, and timbre variation seems good with velocity. Typical sample lengths (<1 sec to ~3 sec) and stretching for Yamaha, though the looping is a bit better than most of what they've done in the past. Nice levels in the recorded file.

Rob, this is another one of those linear phase files, my first from a non-PC based sampler, which makes analysis more difficult. Also has nice blended timbre variation with velocity. I clearly hear stretching and sample lengths in the neighborhood of what Yamaha tends to do. One strange thing is the G7 note, which has so many harmonics it sounds more like G8!

ChrisA, and Rob, thanks much! I'll get on these in-depth tomorrow morning.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/gmjnzdtmm1z/01 V-Piano DP BS Detector.mp3

Dewster,

Above is location of the file on my shared mediafire account.

I tried using garageband but I am useless with technology. There is no optical digital in on my MacBook Pro because it is the 13" version.

In the end I recorded using the V-Piano's coaxial digital out to my stand-alone hi-fi CD recorder. The only problem with it with a digital input is that you cannot adjust rec level and it is slightly quiet. At least it was in the digital domain throughout. I uploaded it from CD into iTunes as a 192kbps mp3 file. I hope you can work with the file. I'm interested to see how the V-Piano performs in your test.

Cheers,

Steve

Thanks again for that file ChrisA!

I reviewed it this morning, and, other than the nice seamless blending of the velocity layers (I couldn't see or hear velocity layer transitions), there are no obvious technical improvements over the P-120. The samples themselves are the same old short 3 seconds max, looped & stretched. Sympathetic resonance sounds unimpressively identical to the P-120.

I'm quite frankly rather shocked at this. And I must admit this is starting to seriously damp my hopes for the new CP1/5/50 products.

One strange thing I notice is the note G7 (second-highest G) sounds strangely like G8! I hear this in my VintAudio sample too. Very odd.


----------------
- Yamaha P-155 -
----------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_yamaha_p155.mp3
- Garage Band.
PROS:
- A very smoothly blended 4 layer (reportedly) sample set with no detectable layer switching.
- Huge dynamic range (~62dB, vel=1:127).
- Sympathetic resonance.
- Responds to partial pedaling.
CONS:
- Obviously looped, though not too badly done as these things go.
- Samples are 3 to 1 seconds (lo to hi) with 1.5 to 0.5 seconds of crossfade to loop.
- Somewhat fast decay of notes.
- Obviously stretched.
- Stretch distances: 3,3,4,4,4,2,4,3,3,3,2,3,3,3,2,2,2,2,3,1,3,3,4,2,2,3,5,10 = 28 groups.
- No key-up or pedal samples.
- Sympathetic resonance fairly fake sounding - echoy and reverby.
- C9 sounds a bit flat and short.
- G7 so bright it sounds more like G8.
OTHER:
- Volume in MP3 file good.
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-08

R0B, the file is in mono for some reason. Any chance you can get me one in stereo?

Flat-line phase plots = Mono recording

Please ignore every idiotic comment I've made about linear phase. All of the flat-line phase plots were due to mono recording.

I accidentally recorded my VintAudio C7 in mono, and the Windows Media Player piano is a mono sample. The VintAudio sample has been re-recorded in stereo & updated in the archive.

Bright G7 = Headphone resonance?

Please also ignore my earlier complaints about G7 being bright, I think this is due to my headphones.

Hi Steve,

Thanks for that! I know it was a fair amount of effort on your part.

Nice to hear what the V-Piano sounds like up-close. Strange that there are velocity discontinuities in something modeled, I wasn't expecting that. And the sympathetic resonance is unfortunately very weak sounding. But it beats all sampled DPs I've heard so far, and is on par with PC samplers.

------------------
- Roland V-Piano -
------------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_roland_v-piano_01.mp3
- Recorded direct to CD recorder.
PROS:
- Beautiful long note decay.
- No looping (modeled).
- No stretching (modeled).
- Sympathetic resonance.
- Responds to partial pedaling.
- Good dynamic range (~34dB, vel=1:127).
CONS:
- No key-up or pedal samples (could be down in the noise floor of this sample?).
- Something like velocity layer switching (abrupt timbre changes) going on at vel=28,40,66,74,100.
- Sympathetic resonance effect is very subtle, almost undetectable.
OTHER:
- MP3 file recorded a bit low, equivalent to ~14 bit resolution.
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-08

Thanks Dewster, very interesting. My ears may not be quite as sharp as they used to be but I can time the sustain in the lower registers to 40+ secs after a good slap on a key. The pedal sample is there (if you mean the little whoosh noise when it is depressed and returned...the level of it is adjustable, I have it fairly discrete), but you might not be hearing it due to the quietness of the recording. Likewise, surprisingly most presets in the vintage section of the V-Piano have sympathetic resonance set pretty low, although you can have as much as you like. I had initially recorded the BS detector in Garageband but through analogue input at the perfect volume but then inadvertently deleted it...The Mac nearly went out the window at that point!

Cheers and thanks on behalf of us all for the work you are doing with this project.

Steve

Sorry you had trouble Steve - this stuff is kind of easy once you set it up, but getting it set up in the first place might drive you crazy if you run into any HW/SW issues.

If you or anyone else wants to submit what might be a better sample, I'd certainly take a listen to it and update the review. I'd like to hear what the key and pedal samples sound like, and I am always very interested in what the sympathetic resonance sounds like.

Interesting points have been raised by the V-Piano test.

1) the DEFAULT Grand Piano 1 (whatever that means!) patch should be used - not a version that has been edited by the user. In the case of V-Piano, I guess Vintage Piano 1 might quality. (However, in terms of the sound quality aspect, V1 Impactance (with the hammers softened) sounds MUCH better.

2) V-Piano's output should be boosted. The default setting is very conservative.

Utility / Output Gain / (I have mine set at +9dB) Experiment to determine what settings work best.

Lawrence

Dewster -

Anything in your tests to suggest that there is any sampling going on in the V-Piano? (A suggestion that has been made by some).

Lawrence

What headphones are you using?

This apparent velocity discontinuity may not be real - the difference in timbre between successive notes may be due to the modelling of the hammer hitting strings that are already vibrating. It would be interesting to repeat the test with a longer gap between notes, to ensure that the notes are COMPLETELY deadened. If the release duration (i.e the rate at which the dampers damp the strings) can be adjusted, it might be prudent to set it as fast as possible for this particular test.

Greg.

Nothing in terms of spectral views - the notes each look fairly random phase-wise. But the obvious velocity discontinuities (I would call this "layer switching" if it were a sampler) are rather strange for what is considered & sold as a 100% modeler. You can easily hear them as timbre variations, and easily see them in the waveform (amplitude / time - oscilloscope) view in Audition.

Ooooooops

1000 apologies.

Here is a stereo file:

http://www.box.net/shared/1r7xiqd8s3

AKG K271 Studio.

Julias O. Smith III discusses what you are talking about as a realistic effect that should perhaps be eliminated in modeled pianos. Start the string over rather than add/subtract energy and create unexpected results.

I'm certainly not trying to harp on the V-Piano, just trying to figure out what is going on in there. Admittedly, the DPBSD is more geared to revealing the limitations of samplers...

Here's what I'm seeing in Audition:

You can see, particularly in the lower (corresponding to the stereo right channel) waveform (envelope actually, this zoomed out) the strange velocity notes that look kind of squashed, while the others look pretty much like they are uniformly increasing. I'm think I hear timbre group changes there too, but maybe it's the gin talking.


So slow the MIDI tempo down and send me a sample already. ;-)

Ahh, much better! I'll review it tomorrow, thanks!

What I'd like to see, ideally, is for the tempo to stay the same, but a distinct gap between each note. Also, I personally can't send you a V-Piano recording, at least not until you send me a V-Piano.

Greg.

Subjectively, I don't find anything in the performance of the V-Piano that suggests velocity switching although I don't hear velocity switching on my Yamaha (which has the same main voice as the P155 I believe). It may be due to the low level of the recording I made but also I was surprised to see that the dynamic range was not greater than some other pianos. Subjectively, the difference between the quietest key strike and loudest is immense.

Lawrence, I used V1 Impactance I think. I turned all effects/reverb etc off but did not even look at what the other stuff such as string resonance, damper resonance etc was doing.

I'll do another recording at a higher level using Vintage 1. Yesterday I did a factory reset so I won't touch any other setting other than to turn reverb off.

I think Greg's point is interesting. If you rock a glass of water and set it washing from side to side you can almost stop it if you introduce another movement out of sync with the washing of the water at the right time. Maybe striking the strings whilst they are vibrating could induce a similar phenomenon, creating a similar graphic effect to velocity switching. Can you tell I'm not a physicist?!!

I'll also reduce the tempo to 60bpm and upload that too to see if there is still evidence of what might be velocity switching.

Unless I can increase the digital output I'll have to record from analogue outs.

Cheers All,

Steve

Steve,
If you play repeated notes on a real piano, with the sustain pedal down, you can hear the effect very easily - each note sounds a bit different. Yes, I think your glass of water analogy is right on. It is my understanding that digital pianos and synths commonly emulate this (very well, IMHO) by simply overlapping "voices", such that as you play each note, the sound of the previous note is allowed to continue to sound. The summation of the voices creates a subtle "phasing" effect which changes every time you play a note. It is plainly obvious to me that this is occuring in two software samplers that I have - I can watch the voice count keep increasing as I play the SAME note repeatedly with the sustain pedal. (even Pianoteq, which is modelled, increases it's voice count a bit, so it may even be doing it the same way) Without the sustain pedal, you would have to play repeated notes very "legato" in order for this to happen, of course.

I am by no means certain that this effect is occurring in your V-Piano recording - it's just a possibility I am raising.

Greg.

Check the Utility / Output Gain setting. Adjusting that may increase the digital output as well.

I hate looping, but this was pretty well done, better than the P-155 IMO (but any looping not done down near the noise floor is a deal-killer for me). Nice blending of velocity layers, except at the high end.

Techniques and implementation almost identical to what Yamaha does in their DPs, which is very interesting.

I wonder why more DPs don't at least try to simulate sympathetic resonance? Too subtle and they figure few people will miss it? Perhaps, as it is often implemented a delay effect, it interacts poorly with the (generally rather poorly done) reverb?

-------------
- Kawai MP5 -
-------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_kawai_mp5.mp3
PROS:
- Nice long note decay.
- Looping isn't too obnoxious.
- Large dynamic range (~42dB, vel=1:127).
- This is a very smoothly blended multi-velocity layer sample set.
- Responds to partial pedaling.
CONS:
- Looped, but pretty well done.
- Samples are 3 to 1 seconds (lo to hi) with 1 to 0.5 seconds of crossfade.
- Obviously stretched, group transistions farily audible.
- Stretch distances: 5,3(x8),2,4,3(x17),2 = 29 groups.
- Velocity layer switch fairly audible (timbre change) @ vel=104.
- No key-up or pedal samples.
- No obvious sympathetic resonance.
OTHER:
- Volume in MP3 file very good, though there are HF (PC soundcard?) tones near the noise floor.
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-09

I'm not sure whether Audition provides a way to script this, but I thought it might be useful for the layering test, to normalize the volume of each note. Sort of like "manning the volume knob", but done automatically. That way, there's only one variable (timbre) to consider, rather than two (timbre and volume.)

Here's an example of what I mean:

http://voltara.org/pw/yamaha_ydp223_gp1_velocity_normalized.mp3

I manually trimmed out the layering test in Audacity, exported to WAV, then ran a shell script (Linux user here) that used the "sox" utility to: split the WAV file into 60 pieces, one for each note (tempo 120 = 0.5 seconds each); adjust the volume of each WAV file to 90% peak; then paste all the pieces back together.

Listening to the result, it sounds to me like either a 2-layer sample with a broad crossfade in the middle, or maybe a filtered 1-layer sample.

I would be curious to know whether the spectral phase graph of the post-processed file reveals any more detail than the original.

Andy

I figured it out - I had a small amount of feedback through the digital I/O in the Echo MIA mixer. Cans sound fine now.

I do it by applying one of several custom envelopes I've developed in Audition to the signal. It amounts to pretty much the same thing, but is actually a bit better for diagnostic purposes because it is a smooth envelope which can reveal small amplitude changes between layers. And you're right, it makes it easier to listen for timbre changes if the volume isn't constantly changing. It also makes the intensity of the spectral views more constant.


Yes, that is what it sounds like to me too. I guess I'm taking Yamaha at their word with the 3-layer thing, as the clues as to where the layers blend are too vague to see or hear. I don't see reference to the layers in the manual, but Sweetwater states "3-layered piano samples with DSS (Dynamic Stereo Sampling)".

Most DPs that have obvious layer switching tend to devote more of the layers to the upper end of the velocity, where the strings and soundboard display more non-linearity I suppose and get much brighter. Thus my comment No real variation in timbre at higher velocities - what you and I are saying boils down to the same thing. I am saying it in the context of other DPs, but but you are describing the effect more directly.

I looked at and listened to your file, but it didn't reveal anything I haven't already seen and heard in Audition. I do appreciate you going to all that effort though. And I'm very glad to see others doing some analysis on these files, and am hoping for more debate and perspectives on what goes on in DPs by studying the sound samples.

http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=23fab7ed7f98c959d9d5c56d04dfa8b09482e6c03f68ebb40ac99885da44e881

Dewster,

I think the above should be a link to my shared MediaFire account.

The folder now contains three files...I deleted the original V-Piano file. I increased the output gain as per Lawrence's instructions to +12db. It is not as loud as I would've liked but I think it is significantly better.

All files recorded direct to CD via coaxial digital out from the V-Piano using Vintage 1, the default grand piano. Reverb (or Ambience as Roland terms it) is off.

1. V-Piano BS Detector at 120 bpm
2. V-Piano BS Detector at 60 bpm
3. Just the velocity section of your midi file played at 20 bpm

Cheers and thanks again,

Steve

Yes, the level is much better, thanks so much for going the extra mile!


OK, the velocity variations for the repeated notes in the layer detection test are different in all of the separate files. Which is really interesting.

I think Roland is (pick one):
a) not aware of it
b) trying to model reality
c) ignoring or content with an emergent behavior from their model

I think a combination of b & c is the most likely answer.

Too bad many hate the midrange, the V-Piano is head and shoulders above any DP sampler I've seen/heard. 3 second (max!) samples + loops suck.


------------------
- Roland V-Piano -
------------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_roland_v-piano_vintage1.mp3
- S/PDIF to CD recorder.
- Factory settings except gain +12dB & reverb off.
PROS:
- Beautiful long note decay.
- No looping (modeled).
- No stretching (modeled).
- Sympathetic resonance, though very subtle.
- Responds to partial pedaling.
- Good dynamic range (~36dB, vel=1:127).
- Nice "loom of strings" pedal down sample, pedal up sample more of a knock.
CONS:
- Key-up sample not audible.
OTHER:
- Quickly repeated notes have somewhat random velocities (modeled reality?).
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-09

I've only listened to the 20bpm velocity reocrding, and I cannot hear anything resembling a velocity "layer" switch - it sounds extremely smooth. I listened both to the original recording as-is, as well as a shortened version where I stripped out a lot of the sustain from each note, to make it easier to detect changes in timbre by simply listening to the recording without performing any analysis.

Greg.

Hi Dewster,

Thanks for taking the time to analyse the Kawai MP-5

Just for your info, I set Damper Resonance, String Resonance and Key Off Effect, all to the midway setting: 5/10. Not sure if I should have set them all on max?

The HF noise you heard/saw, seems to be a result of using USB out, rather than the standard DIN MIDI connectors.

Usually I use MIDI cables into an Edirol UR-80 audio/midi interface, but in this instance, I used the usb out from the DP, straight into a new, fairly well specced PC.

I noticed the noise, too, but when I un-plugged the usb connection, and used the din connectors, the noise disappeared.

Normally I guess we are all more interested in the default, just to know what it will sound like "out of the box" as we assume the factory set it that way in the first place for a reason. But I'm very interested in whether these effects exist and how they sound, so if you feel like doing it again with them turned up, I'll definitely listen to it and archive the second sample with that noted.

Funny, our P-120 has a ton of digital bleed into the audio when we use the Yamaha "to-host" connection (glorified RS-232 with proprietary connector) - so much that we can't use the resulting audio in a solo recording. The MIDI connection is much quieter though.

I had an Edirol UA-25, kind of wish I hadn't sold it.

Hi Dewster,

Here is the link to the updated Kawai MP-5 file (take 2)

This time recorded with standard MIDI cables.

Damper Resonance, String Resonance, and Key Off Effect, all set to the max.

http://www.box.net/shared/29quyz7h2h

Thanks R0B!

The noise floor is MUCH better! Kind of ironic that the very USB connection you are supposed to use to record it introduces so much noise that you can't record it. MIDI connections, when done correctly, are opto-isolated at both receiving ends, which eliminates digital noise and ground loops. Back when real engineers designed interfaces and protocols.

I had to boost the left channel by 6dB to make it roughly the same as the right, not sure what's going on there but with the noise floor so low now it isn't a big deal.

I hear something very faint during the key-up of a loudly vibrating string. It sounds like a damper coming into contact with the string and damping it, rather than a "knock" like sample. It is very pleasant.

I don't hear pedal down or sympathetic resonance though. I'm wondering turning these things up for manual playing is indeed turning them up for MIDI playing? KAWAI James, could you weigh in on this perhaps?

The piano voice is very much on par with what Yamaha does in the P155 and is technically quite good for this price range. What do you think of the other voices, particularly church organ, strings, and harpsichords? And what do you think of the key action?

-------------
- Kawai MP5 -
-------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_kawai_mp5.mp3
- Edirol UR-80 for audio & MIDI interface.
PROS:
- Nice long note decay.
- Looping isn't too obnoxious.
- Large dynamic range (~42dB, vel=1:127).
- This is a very smoothly blended multi-velocity layer sample set (unknown layer count).
- Key-up & pedal up effect w/ vibrating strings subtle yet realistic & pleasant.
- Responds to partial pedaling.
CONS:
- Looped, but pretty well done.
- Samples are 3 to 1 seconds (lo to hi) with 1 to 0.5 seconds of crossfade.
- Obviously stretched, group transistions farily audible.
- Stretch distances: 5,3(x8),2,4,3(x17),2 = 29 groups.
- One velocity layer switch is fairly audible (timbre change) @ vel=104.
- No obvious pedal down samples.
- No obvious sympathetic resonance.
OTHER:
- Volume in MP3 file very good, had to boost L by 6dB to match R.
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-10

It is also much smoother looking than the 120bpm sample.


Perhaps I'm being overly influenced by the amplitude view while listening, but the odd looking notes in the 120bpm sample sound a bit different to me than the other notes, but not like group timbre changes in a layered sampler (hence my updated review).

It would be interesting to repeat the 120bpm recording, with a short delay inserted in between each note (as I said before), to ensure that the notes have completely died away before the next note is played.

Greg.

That one I can answer. When playing MIDI-Files the MP-5 (as many other KAWAI keyboards / DPs) doesn't record any sympathetic resonance / damper resonance effects, theses effects are only active during live play! I have no clue why KAWAI did this, but it's a a fact.

I was anxious about this with my newly purchased CA-63 and tried it on this new model, and am happy to report that at least this issue is now resolved: CA-63 does play all effects also when playing MIDI-Files.

That said, I will send you an MP3-File from my KAWAI CA-63 as soon as I have some time to record it, but this may take some days. Thanks for your great work!

Get outta town! Wow...


I'm looking forward to it, thanks!

What other DP's behave this way? Thanks.

Thanks again, Dewster, for commenting on the MP-5

Your guess about resonance effects not being transmitted, turned out to be spot on!
Thanks to kawaian for the confirmation :-)

I don't do much midi editing, these days, so didn't realise the usb connection was so inferior to standard midi.
It's good to have had the opportunity to find that out.

As for the left channel level being lower, that was possibly due to the fact that this time, I didn't record the DP direct in to the Edirol, as I had it going first through a mixer, that I use for Skype.

(The pan setting on the mixer, was centred, but maybe the calibration is slightly out)

Re the other voices, I quite like the organs and EP sounds. Not mad on the strings, and not expert enough to evaluate the harpsichords, but I am guessing they are not great.
(I could knock up a quick demo for you, if you like.)

I mainly bought it for the piano sound, as I have better vst instruments for other sounds.

Key action is on the light side, tactile and responsive.
Suits my arthritic fingers well.

Rob

I've been playing digital pianos since the 1980's. They've only been getting better and better during that time. The first ones were... well, not that good. I'm coming from the angle of just playing them live, as opposed to the midi file thing you guys have going, though there's nothing wrong with that. I'd just rather actually sit down and play one, rather than analyse it with a midi file. I went to the NAMM show and while there I played both the new Yamaha CP-1 and the Roland V-piano. Both very nice, but the Roland is the one that knocked me out. You guys have got to play one of those, with really nice headphones on. It's pretty unnerving how increadible it sounds and how it feels! These are the high end ones; about $5,000, but compared to a new C7, (not to mention a CFIII, or Bosendorfer, or the like), that's like pocket change. (BTW: I also played the Yamaha CFIII. Mmmm!!) And played a "Robert Weber" that had a VERY nice, sweet high register. But I'm digressing into acoustic realms.

In Japanese, but some info can be gleaned . . .

From what I can glean from Roland's website, (http://www.rolandus.com/products/productlist.php?ParentId=87) it appears that, yes, the RD piano sounds are sampled. I'm sure they are trying to get them more "seamless" all the time. I would also assume that the RD-700GX plug-in would be "as good" as the RD-700GX digital piano, DEPENDING on the quality/resolution of the playback engine (software in your computer, another Roland keyboard, or module?)

In contrast to the RD-700GX piano, which I have played (it's pretty good), the V-piano is NOT sampled but is synthesized, which means no looping, and it's increadibly clean and responsive. Roland has been working hard on this for years, and the results are stunning. (no, they don't pay me).
Try to find and play a Roland V-piano if you can.

Wow, thanks Lawrence!

They're actually talking about velocity layers and looping (the dark underbelly of the DP world)!

And it looks like they're using something very similar to the DPBSD file to demonstrate them. I look at the spectral domain to see looping, not the amplitude domain or a dynamic phase display like they are doing in the video.

No mention of stretching though.

Everyone is able to blend velocity these days - it's not that big of a deal and the least of my worries, though blending is nice. Looping is the killer, with stretching second, velocity stepping third (provided there are enough layers and the transitions aren't too abrupt).

Blending is actually a problem, as the velocity layers become blurred and less easy to see, and so things get all subjective again and we have to rely on the manufacturer to tell us how many layers they used in the blend.

Yes, it's quite amazing. Lawrence has one, and it just recently ran the DPBSD gauntlet. Many hate the midrange though, even with the latest SW load.

Well, hate is a strong word!

The only comments I've seen are from Lawrence and Snazzy. They have both offered their opinion enough times for it to have made an impact on the forum but I haven't seen MANY people say they HATE the midrange...a couple of people have just said the same thing a few times!

I do understand that Lawrence has struggled to get on with it in the context of his particular requirements.

The V-Piano is not the perfect instrument...but then for each of us the perfect instrument doesn't exist...we would all find at least one or two things about any piano we are less keen on.

For my tastes the midrange is a bit less convincing on the V-Piano but the update is an improvement (and any perceived deficiency is an issue of taste rather than it failing to meet an absolute standard). The bass on it is to my ears phenomenal...I personally couldn't improve the bass or high treble and for overall playability (touch, response, subtlety, tonal change according to velocity etc etc), it is second to none.

Despite my above comments and the V-Piano's good showing in Dewster's tests if I had my time again, I wouldn't buy one actually and there are a number of reasons for this. But as a technological Tour-de-Force for Roland I think it is a towering achievement and shows us the future of DPs. In my opinion the future is modelled, not sampled and not hybrids...hybrids maybe for a short while but modelling is where the DP will reach the pinnacle of development in years to come.

Compare the Roland approach with Yamaha who by all accounts (at least by the standards of Dewster's revealing testing), have made almost zero progress between the P120 and P155. Yamaha actually specifically state in their brochures that they use extra-long samples...a second or two appears to be the reality!

Steve

Yes, hate is probably too strong of a word and/or blanket statement, sorry.

I should have said some picky people seem to be unhappy with them, dumping them, or otherwise staying away from them for various reasons.


See what I mean?!


Oh, I quite agree with you. It sounds amazing in the DPBSD MP3, and if I could get that sound for ~$2.5k or less I'd be all over it.

More power to Roland with this incredible technology, we'll all probably end up with something like it sooner or later.


Extra-long samples! For what year?

To be fair, this is one DP in series, and maybe I shouldn't have expected any significant changes? I don't know, but I did expect a substantial sample length increase. Either that or a substantial price drop. I guess it's 90% marketing at this point...

Also, we haven't analyzed the very latest stuff from Yamaha yet.

Steve: I started out (digitally) with the MKB-1000 and an MKS-20, which, together equal your RD-1000, pretty much. I still love the response and dynamics of the Rhodes sounds on that MKS-20 (same as your RD). SO PUNCHY! And of course, the piano sounds are all over recordings, however unrealistic they sound - they've become a "sound" unto themselves, like the early Roland drum machines, which sounded terrible compared to what they were trying to emulate, but also became sought after for their OWN sound.

If you get tired of your V-piano, you can give to me : )

Dave (in So. California, where it's actually been RAINING!)
____________________________________________________________
Roland MKB-1000, 88 key controller, MKS-20, Roland JV-1010 module, Yamaha DX-7 (yep, the oldie), Korg SG Pro X 88 key DP/controller, Yamaha upright. (Longing for Motif XS8 and Korg CX3 organ with Motion sound rotary speaker.)

Dave,

I totally agree with you...The RD-1000/MKS-20 sound emulates a piano very well in terms of expressive power but doesn't sound like a piano...it is far enough away from the real thing to represent something in its own right. And the two electric pianos are to die for. I actually think they (the RD and MKS) are the last instruments to have their own identity and will rank alongside the Rhodes, Wurlitzer and Yamaha Electric grands one day. I will be buried with my RD-1000, it is my most treasured possession.

I don't consider myself to be a musician, I think I'm a geek on the hunt for the holy grail...the piano sound that tugs at my heart strings...the perfect piano. I've come to the conclusion it aint out there and never will be! As far as the V-Piano goes there seems to be two reactions. Musicians seem to love the V-Piano...they don't analyze it or test it, they just make a connection with it in the way it responds to the player's inputs and in this respect it simply is the best keyboard on the market at the moment. I think a lot of musicians don't go beyond that, they don't over-think it. Piano geeks do seem to find something to criticise and I include myself here. I have listened in such depth and tweaked every last parameter trying to find "it"...It can't do what I want it to and I can't even satisfactorily put into words what that is!

So my torture continues but the V-Piano is something special, no doubt, just probably not for me in the long term.

If I win the next lottery here in Europe (jackpot £113 million), the V-Piano's yours!

Cheers,

Steve

CP1 through the DPBS Detector is what we want!

I note the correspondence on the Yamaha Stage Piano thread...fingers crossed it might be soon with the CP1.

Steve