Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards The DPBSD Project!

@dewster,

yeah, I'd also love to see SuperNATURAL tested. Also Roland RD700GX (pre SuperNATURAL), Kawai CA93 and Yamaha Avant Grand would be quite interesting...

BTW, Roland claims they used V-Piano technology to implement velocity steps and decay-tone-change. I wonder if their SuperNATURAL really uses full sampling, or whether they use their old "short" sampling data with just some more processing on top?

@James, would there be any chance for some Kawai test MP3s from you?

While I'm wishing for MP3s, does anyone own a Limex Vienna Grand Piano rack unit? If so, I'd be very grateful for samples of:

2 Grand Piano - lineare Verteilung der 7 Layer
3 Grand Piano - Klassik

They sound really nice in the demos over there. Interesting product.

Isn't the "Superior Grand" patch the same in the GX and SX? If so, that's already been reviewed. Unfortunately not very superior IMO.

What are they going to call these patches when they finally hit on one that is actually any good?

"Superior Grand - trust us, it really sounds great this time, honest!"

From what I've read around the web, the RD700SX and RD300GX share the same AP sound, but the RD700GX's AP is better.

Edit: The main AP patch on the RD700GX seems to be named "Expressive Grand".

BTW, I've just read that SRX cards usually have only 64MB ROM. Which means that the SuperNATURAL SRX extension card probably doesn't have a "fully" sampled piano. Probably they improved velocity and decay purely through added processing...

Nope! I don't care if they're using the latest and greatest sampling and modelling technology or clockwork and talented hamsters! As long as they play and sound great!

Dr.Popper and others have tried these pianos and said how impressed they were, they also said they heard no stretching or looping. What does it matter if it's there if you can't hear it?

I'm certainly not going condemn them for using old technology until I've had the chance to try them for myself!

Finally, a voice of reason! GIANT +1

very well put, sir!

I have to agree with BazC and the above posters.

I get all kinds of compliments from other piano players on the sound quality of my lowly little P-85.

Got another great compliment today from the bass player at our jam session...he thought the P-85 cost at least $2000...quite shocked when I told him the price.

I have several friends that managed to get a CP-1...not one of them said anything but high praise for the acoustic piano sounds, not to mention the fine EP's as well.

Detailed, perhaps even obsessive (well we all know he is ), analysis is fine...but it is only one aspect, and there are many other things that influence us when we purchase an instrument.

I think Dewster should reserve his personal comments about any of these tested pianos, no matter what make or model, until he has actually spent some time playing them.

JMO,

Snazzy

I thought reserving personal opinions (regardless of their origin) was a part of my ex-communist country's history Dewster is perfectly right for himself and he is perfectly free to express his opinions here. It's your right to ignore those opinions or argue them in the context they are presented (in this case the context is a very systematical analysis of digital piano recordings). Suggestions he should reserve his personal opinions seems to be a little bit intolerant towards people who have systematic and demanding nature of scientific type.

And sorry for my obviously stupid English

Yes, that's true, and I'm perfectly right, for myself, in voicing my opinion that he should reserve personal judgements, on pianos he has not played.

I think you are using an out of context example to pass judgement on my statements...we weren't discussing your ex-communist county's history, were we?

You are the intolerant one...you obviously can't tolerate me making my opinion about Dewster...otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation now, would we?

Snazzy

I can see both sides. He (Dewster) may not have played certain pianos but he has exposed some of the engineering behind the products and offers an opinion based on that. Fair enough. Subjectively listening to the instruments (or preferably playing them) gives another kind of insight.

I've found the CP1 to sound very promising on the mp3s in the public domain but I would have to admit to being slightly disappointed following the DPBS test. I mean, it's like lifting the bonnet on a Rolls Royce and finding a Ford engine. And I know you could say that it wouldn't matter as long as the car drove well and I do understand that but from an engineering standpoint it would be, I don't know, incongruous to say the least.

Steve

Whatever...

I know I'm finished with this thread/topic, until I've played the CP-1/CP-5 for myself.

Snazzy

Ok, hamsters, fine, whatever - it's when those hamsters start cranking out audible looping that I care.


Have you even listened to the MP3? I can hear looping pretty clearly on C4.


There's positively, absolutely, definitely more to a DP than just sound, but this thread is devoted to technical aspects of sound generation. If anyone wants to make a thread devoted to keyboard feel, keyboard/sound connection, stage performance, etc. then knock yourself out. Just don't get mad at me for not including such things here.

I did say it sounded pretty fantastic. For a DP. But I think this is a bit of "kill the messenger". I didn't design the thing, I'm just trying to report on some technical aspects of the sound as accurately as I can. I also have subjective opinions about how those various things strike me, which is not a crime.

This was my experience exactly. I really like the sound of the CP1 when playing various pieces on the web, but the DPBSD exposed some rather painful aspects that I personally find problematic. Believe me, for all my ragging on Yamaha, I really wanted to like the CPs. I went out of my way to do the analysis as fairly as I could.

Everyone is free to listen to and analyze the MP3 and post what they think here. This is an open forum, and I hope others will take on some of the analysis, even if only to counter my findings in some way. For instance, looping is often difficult to ascertain on the lowest notes, and stretching is usually difficult to determine at the high end.

If anyone here really likes the latest CPs, by all means buy one, I won't think any less of you - not that that should even matter. We're all adults here, we should all be able to make up our own minds about such things.

I don't believe that you have. You have designed a test suitable for some aspects of a sampled instrument. However, the CP1 is sampled + modeling. You've ignored or discounted the modeled aspects which contribute to the whole package. You've ignored or discounted the interaction of those two elements. You've possibly influenced some to no longer even consider the CP1 / CP5 / CP50. I don't think that that is fair to a brand new product offering.



Wow. Glad to have your permission. Now I can go ahead and purchase a CP1. Oh, wait. I already did.

I've got pretty good ears, actually very good ears, and I'm a very successful musician. In other words, I can actually play the instruments I buy, and make money doing it.

I've felt rather insulted by my latest acquisition - CP1 - being panned (to use polite language) without all of the AP features / technology being considered. It's a hybrid, for God's sake. It's unfair to ignore the the modeled aspects, and their interpolation with the sampled.

OK. Now that I've gotten that out of my system. I too am out of this thread.

Wowsers....

dewster, you're an amazing fellow. I'll send you an HP-307 sample once it arrives in a few weeks (unless someone else beats me to it). I want the honest truth, insofar as your test is able to reveal.

Some people seem to be really pissed off by this technical test... They just ignore the fact which dewster clearly stated, that this test is just an indication, but never a real sound quality test.

Anyway, I'll send dewster the CA-63 MP3 (which is soundwise identical to the CA-93) as soon as possible. The only thing I'm waiting for is the announced firmware update so that the sound sample represents the current improvements.

I got my CP1 today... I would state that to my ears there is no audible stretching or looping on this board when I'm playing it. I do not care what any software analysis says about this board I think that this is the second best acoustic sound on a DP I've ever heard (the first isn't even released yet) I trust my ears far more then I trust anything else and the CP1 gets a big thumbs up from me. Ivory II sounds synthetic by comparison and the Roland "Supernatural" kit is a totally different tonality to the CP1/5/50 and cannot compare. Mind you I consider the S6 piano patch in the s90Xs to be completely adequate for nearly every piano piece I need to play. The CP1/5/50 is if anything ...overkill in sound quality for a stage piano. Its more then you will ever need.

The denial or avoidance of disconfirming evidence is a common ego defense mechanism associated with the experience of cognitive dissonance felt as emotions arising from the anxiety otherwise known as decision regret or buyer's remorse. YMMV.