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

It's been my experience that 88 wrongs never make a right.

Play lots of short notes, slather on the reverb, layer it, but if you start with crap all you end up with is a crap sandwich.

You didn't want to get involved in a comparison, right?

Okay then for this post: given your or somebody else's clinical, mainly headphone based unnatural (for piano and humans) PC screen environment, I am totally unimpressed with those thin, static, digital sounding engineering samples given in this thread, that's including any boring, lifeless, single piano note recording of whatever source.

People be certain that this has absolutely nothing to do with actually playing and enjoying your musical instrument, either digital or acoustic, e.g. HP307, CA63 or C7. Honestly, I'm having a hard time even recognizing my own preset this way, for the rest I'm doing just fine, thanks: I prefer to actually play my organic and expressive sounding CA93 in dual voice mode with live acoustics every day!

Yes, pay no attention to that loop behind the curtain.

OK, I edited the post to include the layered UPHI.

https://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubb...0The%20DPBSD%20Project!.html#Post1550886

Is the new piano in the MP6 based on the same samples as this CA63?

I think dewster's test are very valuable indeed for knowing how a dp will sound. I discovered this when I bought Alicia's Keys and immediately noticed a very limited dynamic range and several dead sounding notes. These problems were immediately apparent when I belately listened to and read dewster's review of AK. At 5:08 into the mp3 you can clearly hear the dead notes. I was playing a slow David Nevue song (Winter Twilight) and the dead E and F notes really ruined the song.

Also here is a list of dynamic ranges as measured by dewster:
Item range (db)
EWQL Gol Bos 23
Kurz PC3X 29
Roland RD700 31
Alicia's Keys 32
Garritan 39
Ivory Bos 40
Kawai MP5 42
Kawai CN33 45
GalaxyII Stein 46
EWQL Bech 47
Roland RD700SN 47
Roland HP307 47
PX330 49
Pianissimo 50
Kawai CA63 51
GalaxyII VG 53
PianoTeq 54
GalaxyII Vint D 55
TruePianos 59
Yam P155 62
Yam CLP330 62
Yam CVP505 66
Yam P120 68

You can see that AK is among the lowest.

In summary I think dewster's tests do predict how a dp or VI will play and I would have saved money if I had read and listened to his report first.

Well, if that's the case, then this comparison makes for an easy decision:


Yes, the CA63 is lower priced.

Relatively speaking, the dynamic range of the Kawai CA93/CA63 in dual voice mode can be even about 3db higher than in single voice mode, depending on the selected preset.

It is my understanding that the MP6 samples are from the previous superceded technology that was in the previous model the CA51.

Jake, the MP6 uses the same PHI (Progressive Harmonic Imaging) sampling technology that is found in the current generation CN23 and CN33 instruments. However, it should be noted that the MP6 includes additional (new) piano sounds that are not found on the CN models.

I hope this answers your question.

Cheers,
James
x

Kawai's sound technology is organised as follows (oldest to newest):

- Harmonic Imaging
- Harmonic Imaging, 88-key piano sampling
- Progressive Harmonic Imaging*
- Ultra Progressive Harmonic Imaging*

* inherits 88-key piano sampling

The CA51 used 'Harmonic Imaging' while the MP6 uses 'Progressive Harmonic Imaging', so in actual fact the MP6's tone generator newer than the CA51 by two generations.

Cheers,
James
x

Edtek, thanks for the feedback! Sorry about your experience. As you say, with Alicia's Keys there is quite a bit of timbre variation from one adjacent note to the next, particularly over the low end, which is rather pronounced. And the dynamic range is firmly on the small side.

Although I don't place dynamic range in the pro or con review sections anymore, small dynamic range often sounds unrealistically loud when played lightly. I'm not sure what to make of the really wide dynamic ranges typically found in Yamaha DPs, but it wouldn't surprise me if there weren't some happy medium that behaves the most realistically. I need to do some experiments on our Young Chang to get some idea of what's what here.

Ah, if it were only that easy.

A.f.a.i.k. Yamaha still owns a patent related to 'silent' DP key pressing.

James, I don't personally hate you or anything, but the only term I understand there is "88-key piano sampling" which in my terms means no stretching.

It's my special purpose in life lately to grill any and all company reps for actual technical specs, so could you please elaborate on the differences between HI, PHI, and UPHI? This is gobbledygook nonsense to me. And, yes, I understand that everyone does this - could Kawai buck the top secret corporate trend and Do The Right Thing by DP enthusiasts? I think there are many out here who would appreciate some straight talk.

dewster,



Thank goodness - I'll sleep soundly tonight, safe in this knowledge.



Correct.



No, not to the level of detail that would satisfy an engineer such as yourself, I'm afraid. Sorry.

Cheers,
James
x

Thanks for replying - and I really mean that.

I wasn't asking necessarily for sensitive engineering info, though that would certainly be most welcome - think of me more as an interested consumer looking for more information about a product before deciding on a purchase. Not so much for myself obviously, but for my wife's church and students. If a Kawai DP offers the best keys and sound at a certain price range I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it. But say I've narrowed it down to two different Kawai DPs, one with older sound and one with newer: how do I judge the dollar value to me of the difference?

I get that HI / PHI / UPHI this is something of a good / gooder / more gooder product sound technology tiering, but how will I perceive this if I play the various versions?

PHI is somehow progressive. How or what is progressive?

And UPHI, being ultra, is somehow an improved version of PHI. How or what is improved?

Any info at all that might differentiate these categories would be appreciated. I'm not trying to spar with you or pin you to the mat or anything, I'm actually just very interested in this subject.

dewster, I tend to use (some might say overuse...) the term 'expressiveness' when describing the different levels of Harmonic Imaging. I believe Rimmer's recent post comparing the CN33 and CA63 (PHI and UPHI respectively) summed it up nicely - it's difficult to put your finger on quite what is different, but the UPHI sound is just somehow more 'expressive'.

Unfortunately, that's not the kind of thing that be observed in a Youtube clip or MP3 demo (even one that's been transcoded...) - you really need to 'feel' the subtle changes in timbre. That's why I'm always recommending consumers play-test instruments 'in the flesh' before making any purchasing decisions. I realise this may mean require extra leg-work seeking out a dealer, but it's really the only way to be absolutely confident that the instrument you're buying is the right one for you.

Cheers,
James
x

According to this post: https://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubb...0and%20MP10%20Stage%20P.html#Post1511408 UPHI uses twice the memory of PHI.

Now, whether that's more velocity layers, longer samples, higher bitrate or something else entirely I don't know; but there's a little more information for you at least.

Aaron

Okay, I'l take a shot at this.

At this link ---

http://www.kawaius.com/main_links/digital/harmonic_imaging.htm

it says:

"Since each dynamic level of the piano carries a unique harmonic signature, our engineers created extremely accurate stereo 'maps' of the entire dynamic range for each key. Next, Kawai developed a proprietary new process called Harmonic Imagingâ„¢ to transform this vast 'harmonic portrait' into a vibrant re-creation of the EX Concert Piano. Harmonic Imaging faithfully reproduces the rich dynamic range of the original piano, from delicate pianissimos to thunderous fortissimos."

It sounds to me like Harmonic Imaging is a kind of modeling, applying algorithms to what is probably a single layer, in order to simulate the variations in tone that occur over a key's dynamic range. That's how I'd interpret taking a "harmonic portrait" of a note's response from ppp to fff and applying it to actual samples.

At this next link --

http://www.kawaius.com/main_links/digital/Features/harmonic_imaging.html

it says:

"Progressive Harmonic Imaging allows for even more harmonic content to be employed"

More harmonic content could mean brighter when hit harder and/or a revised "harmonic portrait" created from a greater number of "steps" between ppp and fff, or captured at a finer resolution.

I couldn't find anything with any description of what Ultra adds. I would guess it is probably "more of the same" (i.e. even more steps in the model between ppp and fff for smoother and more accurate dynamic transitions, or even more detailed harmonic analysis of each step to be used in the modeling).

But one thing seems consistent in all the descriptions: It has to do with capturing sonic differences within the dynamic range of a given note from ppp to fff. Each step apparently captures or simulates this range in finer detail.

Just for balance, and I'm not having a go at you Dewster given your love of SuperNatural, but the term SuperNatural is just about as bad as it gets and certainly worse than PHI, UHPI, etc IMHO. I mean come on 'supernatural' - puke!