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

Well said, JMMEC!

So, how many of the early cheerleaders and supporters are still on board?

What has changed from the beginning of the thread to the end?

Thanks again for the file!

The real sample lengths are a bit short, as are the decay times. And that stretch group of 5 is kind of big. But otherwise it's not too bad.


---------------
- Yamaha P-80 -
---------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dp_bsd_v1.3_yamaha_p80.mp3
- "Grand Piano" patch.
- RCA outs to MacBook line in, Audacity, MP3 export (Lame).
PROS:
- Large dynamic range (~54dB, vel=1:127).
- 3 velocity layer sample set.
- Responds to partial pedaling.
CONS:
- Note decay rate is pretty fast (~1/2 Pianoteq).
- Obviously looped, some loops have an audibly wider stereo field than the samples.
- Sample lengths are (C2:C9) 1.8,1.6,1.1,1.2,1.2,1,?,? seconds.
- Obviously stretched.
- Stretch distances: 3(x6),2,3,3,5,4,2,2,3,4,2,3,4,2(x5),3(x7),1,1 = 32 groups.
- Obvious layer switching, but not too obnoxious.
- Layer switch @ vel=70,106 (spectral pan & phase displays).
- No key-up or pedal up/down samples.
OTHER:
- Something going on with sympathetic resonance? If so it's very subtle.
- MP3 levels good: peak @ -0.4dB, noise floor @ -58dB.
- Date reviewed: 2010-02-17

Calm down, Jim, No need of getting that hysterical.

It's just a fun test...it ain't serious.

I'm sure good old Elia would have wanted you to have those elusive hard and exact facts, and perhaps a cold cloth for your forehead.

Too many biases, too many potential errors, at best an approximation...at worst, a parlor trick.

Snazzy

theJourney, well I'm still onboard.

As I believe I stated earlier in the thread, from a technical standpoint, dewster's test offers a very interesting benchmark.

However, from a purely musical perspective, it obviously doesn't tell the whole story. My concern is that some individuals (first-time buyers for example) may read too much into this analysis, rather than judging the overall instrument.

Just because a DP appears to perform reasonably well in dewster's test, it doesn't mean to say that everyone will find the instrument's sound to be universally agreeable. At the end of the day, if an individual doesn't particularly like how a DP sounds, no amount of information about sampling lengths, layers, stretching, polyphony, or any other technical specification is going to change their mind.

Cheers,
James
x

I'd say what has changed, is trust...or lack of it.

Not in Dewster, although I seem to sense a bias in his posts, but for me it is the calibre of the results, the use of varying quality MP3 instead of WAV recorded by one person with the same equipment, and the possibility of bogus uploads.

That's all.

Snazzy

@snazzyplaer, I agree. But - isn't this always the case, with all testing, with all statements we read in a public forum? Shouldn't this speak for itself? Why picking all the time on this well known fact? Everyone here can just CLAIM that he has played a specific DP with terrific results. Why trust him more? Why can't we just move on knowing that this is just a limited technical test, with only limited significance. The ultimate decision of buying a new DP can of course only be take by playing the DP for some time, doing comparisons etc etc. So - what's the point? I don't get it (call me stupid...).

And: Why did this questionable discussion just start after dewster published his findings on the CP-1? Just a coincidence?

BTW I tried both WAV and MP3 (192kbit) on a recording with no significant difference in visual appearance, let alone audible differences.

Still onboard here.

The tests are good. They add to our knowledge (I mean, this is a good thing, right?). No one is saying that you would base a purchase decision based solely on the DPBSD.

I own a V-Piano. Although the test is not really designed to compare sampled pianos with modelled ones I fully note the exceptional performance of the V-Piano in the test. But here's a thing: I don't really like my V-Piano. I'm fairly sure I have the same issues that Lawrence did and that prompted him to change it for a CP1. Although still well within the honeymoon period, he seems at this stage to be much happier subjectively with the CP1 than he was with the V-Piano. And I know from my correspondence with him that there are aspects of the V-Piano he admires a lot, as do I.

All that said, for me, the sample lengths that Yamaha are using and the presence of note stretching just takes the sheen off this supposedly vanguard instrument...Yamaha's top-of-the-range. This is the best they can do at the moment apparently.

I know that playing the thing is the final evidence anyone needs and it appears Yamaha have indeed got a winner on their hands but to know its technical DNA if you like is interesting and in this case a bit disappointing to me, personally. But I'd rather have this knowledge. I don't think there is any conspiracy and I don't think Dewster's integrity should be questioned.

In concluding maybe I could just say that we can all take what we want from the test. Colleen is maybe about to take the plunge on a CP1 and we would all want that to be a positive experience for her. To her and maybe Snazzy and others the test has little significance. To others, it is now a very useful resource, one to be used in conjunction with evidence gathered by other means, especially personal experience.

Cheers all,

Steve

Thanks Steve for your comment. This is in other words exactly what I think of this technical test. I'm also disappointed by the sound signature of a pianoteq demo I recently tested, and was rather happy with my truepianos although technically clearly inferior, but it's all about personal preference and playability.

I really don't know why it started when it did...with me it was brewing before that happened.

To quote Kawai James: "My concern is that some individuals (first-time buyers for example) may read too much into this analysis, rather than judging the overall instrument."

Colleen, and myself too, felt the same way and everyone got defensive.

Coincidence?

Snazzy

Snazzy and Colleen,

It's entirely possible for someone to send me a bogus or doctored file, but since the entire world has access to the archive I think that would be revealed sooner or later. Other than boosting the left channel by 6dB to match the right in the Kawai MP5 file (as noted in my review) I'm certainly not altering them in any way.

So which MP3 files do you think are bogus? I would be very curious to know, as would others. You both have mentioned that manufacturers watch these forums closely, and it would be pretty fantastic to catch one of them in the act of monkeywrenching the DPBSD. Or is that what you two are doing by planting tons of FUD in this thread?

I would be more concerned about you putting false data on a public forum...not that you would intentionally.

It's not manufacturers doing bogus uploads (although that would be a hoot) that concerns me...I don't think they would ever take that risk...what concerns me is their reaction to false data about their product on a public forum.

I'm not sure what FUD means (perhaps you could explain it to the listening audience), but I can assure you, my remarks have been only to point out the possibility of errors, biases, and bogus uploads.

If it bothers you, just put me on "ignore".

Snazzy

Exactly what "false data" are you talking about? You really need to stop it with the coy innuendo and veiled threats.


For those who can't Google: Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.


It's kind of hard to ignore libel.

I'm talking about the possibility of bogus uploaded data...that's all. Never said you did it, nor anyone else....just a possibily.

You yourself said it could be possible, as well as several other members.

So we are all "libel", are we...including yourself?

Snazzy

This thread seems to be degenerating - needlessly.

Dewster quite clearly has an agenda - he made that clear in numerous posts bemoaning the manufacturers' slow adoption of new technology. However, by actually coming up with a method for analyzing the way the sounds are generated in various DPs, he's done us all a service. Even when one factors in a margin of error for the way the files are recorded and analyzed, the results are interesting and illuminating.

That said, it was also fascinating for me to listen to some of the uploaded files and compare them (subjectively) with the test results. For example, the V-Piano scores very high on the tests, but when I listened I could quite clearly hear the problem with the mid-range that has irritated a number of owners. It just sounded synthetic and, to me, unappealing. So, being able to listen to the recorded sounds is vital for extracting the most from the work that Dewster's done. But, put the two together and you've got a very powerful tool for making initial comparisons prior to going out and actually playing the instruments.

Sorry, I'll get back OT, I was just trying to get to the bottom of a major distraction in this thread. Which amazingly seems to boil down to pretty much nothing.

Listening to the files has been a real treat for me too as I get the opportunity to hear a broad range of DPs. And listening combined with analysis lets me very quickly understand what it is in the sound that strikes me as real or fake. The kinds of things that might take years of owning the DP to figure out.

Dewster, adding your interpretation of the test to the subjective impression of the sound of the notes, what is your favourite so far?

Steve

Or an hour sitting down and actually playing the instrument.

Snazzy

I bought my DP (the YDP-223 that I uploaded) two years ago, about a month before I took my first lesson. For a number of reasons, I went digital as opposed to acoustic, but wanted an instrument that felt and sounded reasonably "authentic", so that my skills would transfer readily to an acoustic. Based on my limited knowledge, the manufacturer's specifications, some play testing (and a fantastic discount on a floor model with minor cosmetic damage), I went with the YDP-223.

When I got it home and started to play it, something about the sound began to perplex me -- it wasn't until about a year later that I finally figured out why. What I couldn't figure out was where to set the volume control. I could lower the volume and bang the keys harder, or raise the volume and play lightly, and the results were roughly the same.

I learned later on that the key element I was missing out on was convincing velocity layering. Had this thread existed back then, it would have been a great way for a then-newbie like me to listen and learn about this sort of thing. Would it have made me choose a different instrument? Probably not, as the sound was only one of many factors influencing my decision -- highest on the list was touch, but I also took into account price, MIDI connectivity, the number of pedals, form factor, and "wife acceptance factor" ;-)

Even if the DP-BSD wouldn't have changed my decision, I would have known a lot more about what exactly I was paying for, and perhaps I wouldn't have spent so much time fretting over where to put the volume slider. (Now it's "as low as possible when using headphones" to protect my hearing from hours of practice...)

The argument I've seen repeated here, that dewster's analysis will negatively influence a novice buyer, is, in my opinion, unfounded. The intended audience here is not the foolish buyer, because he will shop foolishly regardless. But for those of us who want to make an informed purchase, I'm thankful for resources such as this. It's the "missing spec sheet" that goes deeper than the typical "Voices: X, Polyphony: Y".

Andy

Intelligent points there Andy!

Steve