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

dewster, thank you for removing the incorrect statements from your MP10 DPBSD review.

As noted yesterday evening, the DPBSD MIDI file does not contain the MP10's setup Sys-Ex header used to select the desired sound and parameters. Therefore, the instrument's currently selected panel voice will always be used for playback.

On the MP10, changing the panel voice after a MIDI file has been loaded into memory will not change the voice used for playback. This is by design, and allows the player to change the panel (keyboard) voice freely without affecting MIDI playback (e.g. using a MIDI backing track in a live performance).

When tinybox prepared the MP3s of the MP10's Concert1, Pop1, and Jazz1 sounds, it appears that he did not reload the DPBSD MIDI file after selecting each patch. This meant that the Concert1 sound was still used for MIDI playback and the subsequent MP3s produced.

Now, it should have been reasonably obvious when listening to the MIDI playback that the sound was not actually changing. However, in fairness to tinybox, the current DPBSD SMF is over six minutes long (and not terribly harmonious at that...), so I can perhaps understand why he didn't check the recordings before sending them for analysis.

Fortunately, tinybox has since re-recorded the Pop1 and Jazz1 MP3s (this time correctly reloading the MIDI file after selecting each sound), which can now be downloaded in dewster's corrected MP10 review above. I believe anyone who listens to these MP3s should be able to hear the distinct tonal differences between the three sound categories. This is because they each utilise separate sample data recorded using different mics and micing configurations.

Well, I hope this clears up any remaining confusion regarding the MP10's acoustic piano sounds. Perhaps the moral of this story is to be more trusting of your ears - if three MP3s all sound exactly the same, it's mostly likely because they in fact are.

Kind regards,
James
x

The MP10 post is now corrected - much thanks again to tinybox for the samples, and to James for pointing out the issue with the MP3s! For those who downloaded the Jazz and Pop MP3s I encourage you to do it again and give them another listen (the new files have a "_v2.mp3" on the end).

There is much interest here in Kawai's latest models and so I wanted to get the review out as soon as I could, though obviously a bit more due diligence on my part was called for. This was totally my oversight and I hope it hasn't caused too much confusion.

Dewster, do you think there is difference between the CA63's Concert Grand and the one in MP10?

Good question, and something I wasn't really thinking about when I was reviewing the MP10. Here are the attack / loop lengths from the two reviews:

- Attack sample lengths (C1:C8) -
CA63: 3.0,3.0,2.1,1.6,1.4,1.5,0.97,? seconds.
MP10: 2.5,3.0,2.2,1.8,1.7,1.5,1.1,? seconds.

- Loop sample lengths (C1:C8) -
CA63: 1.4,1.3,0.68,0.83,0.64,0.74,0.63,? seconds.
MP10: 1.4,1.3,0.66,0.83,0.65,0.75,0.65,? seconds.

There is always some ambiguity associated with measuring these things at the highest and lowest ends. Taking that into account the match is very good.


Figure 1. Spectral pan view of stretch test, mid notes, CA63 on left, MP10 on right. No significant differences.


Figure 2. Spectral phase view, left to right: CA63 note C2, MP10 note C2, CA63 note C5, MP10 note C5. No significant differences.

I can't comment on how the incidental sound effect noises (key up & pedal down) match up between the two DPs because they aren't present in the CA63 DPBSD MP3 file (though they are present in the MP10 file).

It seems the sound source is same, thank you for the analysis! I hope they bring the resonances with MIDI on CA63 the same way as it is working with MP10. I doubt the firmware is much different in regards to that functionality. Hopefully James will be our agent

CyberGene,



The MP models have always offered this functionality, however the console instruments (CN/CA/CL...except CN4x) unfortunately do not support the playback of resonance etc. via MIDI. There are obviously major differences between the stage piano and console piano firmwares, thus it may not be possible to implement with a simple update.

Kind regards,
James
x

I just checked the Midi implementation charts of both the CA93/CA63 and MP10: supporting only a few more control change Midi messages is all that's needed to get useful CA93/CA63 MIDI in/out functionality for PC MIDI-recording, editing and playback (but I have no programmer's insight/access to the firmware).

I don't believe the issue is MIDI implementation per se - it is more about effects and incidental sounds that are present when you play the CA63 normally via the keys, but missing when you play it via the MIDI in port. Pedal & key sympathetic resonance and key up "clunk" sounds are missing, and there may be others. The CN33 has the same issue.

Rolands with the SN piano engine have much the same problem, though many report success in either partially or fully re-enabling these sounds for MIDI playback via MIDI SYSEX commands.

250K VIEWS - Happy New Year!

Just in time for the New Year, the DPBSD thread has reached the quarter million views mark - thanks everyone for the interest! Big thanks to Pianoworld for hosting this forum, and for bringing such great people together!

Huge, huge thanks to those individuals who went way out of their way to provide DPBSD MP3 files of the various DPs reviewed!*

The DPBSD Honor Roll
10 pesk
7 setchman
3 anotherscott
3 Glenn NK
3 jve
2 ChrisA
2 CyberGene
2 EssBrace
2 octurn
1 Martin C. Doege
1 bkmz
1 Goofball Jones
1 jens4711
1 kawaian/mucci
1 kurtie
1 M.Schreck
1 Mawima
1 Melodialworks Music/Lawrence
1 mkhor
1 nan
1 NikkiPiano
1 pkdd
1 R0B
1 sandord
1 sdw91
1 tinybox
1 Vincentimes
1 Voltara
1 Volusiano
1 Yuri Pavlov
1 zaba19


Woo-hoo! Cake for everyone!** Happy New Year!

(I'd say "tickle those Kit-Kats" but you might sprain your finger trying to play a D note!)

* Due to the recent home renovations going on here at casa del dewster I haven't had much spare time, and so am sitting on several MP3s that I fully intend to get to just as soon as I can.

** BYOB - the DPBSD thread doesn't have a valid NJ liquor license.

Oh god...they will be American Kit Kats you have there. Vile. What is it with American chocolate? It's all the more cruel for a Brit...you go on holiday to the States and...what's this?...wow, they have Kit Kats!...you devour a bit of Kit Kat and spend the rest of the day vomiting. Cruel American trick!

Congrats Dewster on your amazing success with the DPBSD thread. Hope RD-700NX ownership is working out for you, your wife and her students!

Cheers,

Steve

Thanks Steve!

And I know where you're coming from re all of the "milk chocolate" (blea) here - too light & sweet & soft. I like the hard, bitter, dark varieties - and I don't say no to a liquor center!

Absolutely right about the kit-kats. They now do make dark chocolate versions here in the U.S.. They're not as easy to find, but they are much better. The milk chocolate just tastes like wax.

But I'm going to have to find a way to post a picture of a couple of similarly themed cakes that have been made for my birthdays!

Meanwhile, I am about to ascend on that honor roll... I've sent a bunch of files, and more are on their way. Thanks for all your efforts, dewster!

I had a bit more leisure time back when the pesk avalanche hit.

Thanks for all of your efforts too anotherscott!

Yamaha NP-V80 Review



A fourth DPBSD MP3 submission from anotherscott, this time for the Yamaha Piaggero Series NP-V80 - outstanding! The MP3 is of the default voice "Live! Grand Piano". As a bonus, anotherscott also recorded the third voice "Grand Piano" which I have also uploaded to the share point:

PIX: http://www.mediafire.com/?evrtrouov30djwc
MP3: http://www.mediafire.com/?0ob1t0t84d70ylu
BONUS MP3: http://www.mediafire.com/?8v3q9vty1midmtw (the third patch "Grand Piano").

I listened to the third voice once through and decided not to review it as it is inferior to the main patch. In particular the note decay is faster, the attack and loop samples are shorter, and it is more stretched than the main voice. The reason anotherscott provided it is because odds are it is identical to the main piano voice in the NP-V60 (though that hasn't been confirmed by Yamaha) so anyone interested in that DP might want to give it a listen. If that turns out to indeed be the case I'll probably give it a full review.

Since the NP-V80 is lumped together with the also very portable NP-30, it shares the same "NP" product prefix, and also because it is a newer DP, I was pretty much expecting the piano voice to be better that of the NP-30 (which I recently reviewed) but instead it's something of a mixed bag. They are similar in that they both pass the quick partial damping test, both support half pedaling, both fail the pedal and key sympathetic resonance tests, and both have fairly comparable (though not identical) attack sample lengths. Where they differ is the NP-30 passes the silent replay test, whereas the newer NP-V80 fails this test, which is weird. The NP-V80 has longer decay samples than the NP-30, which makes it sound somewhat more natural to me, but the decay times themselves seem shorter, which sounds more unnatural, so that's something of a tossup. Both are fairly stretched though the newer NP-V80 is actually stretched more than the older NP-30, and I think the stretch group transitions on the NP-V80 are easier to hear as the timbre matching between the groups is not very well done - and seemingly less well done compared to the NP-30. There are two huge stretch groups on the NP-V80 located at either end of the note range, with the lowest one responsible for imparting a fairly fake sound to the very lowest notes. Though I suppose, since the lowest note on the NP-V80 keyboard is an E, most won't notice this unless they heavily transpose it or run a MIDI file through it.

I assume this is a layered sample set with the layers smoothly blended, but since Yamaha doesn't come out and say this, and also since the NP-30 is purportedly a single layered instrument (or at least most of us here are assuming so - anyone got a link to confirm this?) this may not be the case. I couldn't see or hear anything in the way of layer steps, and the timbre gradually brightens with increasing velocity, though the change is limited more to the lower and middle velocities. I think the timber change with velocity in general is better implemented on the NP-V80 than on the NP-30.

The case design of this DP makes no sense to me. I understand chopping keys off for portability, but why fill those spaces back in with other stuff and needlessly re-lengthen it? On the NP-30, Yamaha idiotically placed the speakers on the ends. On the NP-V80 they positioned the speakers rationally above the key bed, put then stuck a pitch bend wheel to the left and a USB slot to the right of the keys.

Anyway, if you were considering the NP-V80 or NP-30 for their piano voices, I'd say give them a very close listen to see which one suits you the best as there surprisingly is no clear winner here. You might also want to consider the other features and voices in the NP-V80 if you find yourself on the fence.

I've spent much of this review comparing it to the the NP-V80 to the NP-30, but perhaps my expectation of it being an "improved" NP-30 is a naive assumption. Someone at Yamaha told anotherscott that NP-V80 wasn't created as an updated NP-30, it was created as an updated YPG-235 (which is also why it has no MIDI ports, just USB).

Much thanks to anotherscott for submitting the test samples for this highly portable DP!

Some analysis pix and text review:


Figure 1. Spectral pan view of the pedal sympathetic resonance test, stimulus removed, normalized to -1dB to increase clarity, pedal down @ left, pedal up @ right. No visible or audible pedal sympathetic resonance.


Figure 2. Spectral frequency view of the key sympathetic resonance test. No visible or audible key sympathetic resonance.


Figure 3. Waveform view of the entire looping test, vertical zoom applied to see the noise floor. The decay rate is pretty fast.


Figure 4. Spectral pan view of the note C3, normalized to -1dB to increase clarity, cursor at attack / loop transition. Attack and loop sample lengths are rather short.


Figure 5. Spectral phase view of the stretch test, low end of the notes, normalized to -1dB to increase clarity. Low end is very stretched which makes the lowest notes sound somewhat fake. Stretch group transitions are quite audible over most of the range.


Figure 6. Spectral frequency view of the layer test. Timber variation with velocity is smooth, but there isn't much timbre change in the upper ~1/4 range (where you would generally expect the most change).


Figure 7. Spectral phase view of the layer test, compressed 20:1. Smooth timbre variation with no visible or audible layer switching.


-----------------
- Yamaha NP-V80 -
-----------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dpbsd_v1.9_yamaha_np-v80.mp3
- This is the first patch: "Live! Grand Piano".
- Setup: Headphone out, Mbox interface @ 24-bit, Mac with ProTools LE, MP3 via Quicktime Pro.
- Recorded by "anotherscott".
PROS:
- Passes the quick partial damping test.
- Passes the half pedaling test.
- Note damping sounds rather "buzzy" and realistic.
- I believe this is a very smoothly blended multi-layer sample set.
CONS:
- Fails the pedal sympathetic resonance.
- Fails the key sympathetic resonance test.
- Fails the silent replay test (damps @ pedal up).
- Note decay times are very short.
- Obviously looped, both visibly and audibly over the lows and mids.
- Audibly abrupt volume change at the attack/loop transition for note C1.
- Loop sample lengths are fairly short and audible over the lows and mids.
- Attack sample lengths are (C1:C8): 2.2,1.8,1.3,1.6,1.3,1.4,0.6,? seconds.
- Loop sample lengths are (C1:C8): 1.3,0.85,1.1,1.2,1.0,0.8(?),?,? seconds.
- Very stretched, visible and audible over the entire range.
- Poor timbre and stereo pan matching between stretch groups.
- Stretch distances: 8,4(x3),3,3,4(x8),3,3,7,5,12 = 19 groups.
- Not a lot of timber variation with velocity in the upper ~1/4 range.
- No obvious pedal up/down or key up "clunk" samples.
OTHER:
- Dynamic range 47dB (vel=1:127).
- Notes played @ vel=1 produce no sound.
- MP3 levels: peak @ -1.2dB, noise floor @ -57dB.
- Date reviewed: 2011-01-16

Generalmusic Promega3 Review



A new DPBSD entry from Pianoworld forum member "Qbert" - thanks! - and the third GEM instrument reviewed in this thread.

The GEM Promega3 test much like the RP-X and pRP-800 that I reviewed previously (pRP-800 RP-X) so you might want to check those out as well. By comparing phase signatures, I believe the main piano in the Promega3 and the pRP-800 Steinway voices were derived from the same sampling session, though with different processing applied to them.

GEM DPs generally have long attack samples, but this one has the longest attack sample lengths I've encountered in a hardware digital piano, with a whopping 8.5 seconds of attack and crossfade on the note C1. These long attacks are unfortunately coupled to very short loops that sound fairly artificial on the lower notes, and further subjected to the standard amount of GEM stretching (stretch groups in the mid 40s) which is also audible from the lower end through the mids. To a large extent the long attack samples mask the very short loops as the loops then happen way out in the decay where they are lower in amplitude, but somewhat longer loops would have been very welcome (as would no stretching).

Both the pedal and key resonance that GEM incorporates in their instruments sound pleasant, and half pedaled notes sound realistically buzzy. Decay times for the low and mid notes are nice and long. There are no obvious layer switches as GEM reports only a single layer is employed, and most timbre change is in the upper 2/3 velocity range where it probably should be. Like the other GEM DPs it fails the silent replay test @ pedal up. I couldn't detect any obvious pedal up/down or key up sound effects, and the dynamic range is rather narrow which makes softly played notes sound somewhat too loud.

Qbert has this to say about the Promega3:



Looking through the Promega3 manual it appears to have a very functionally driven user interface, much like the Kawai MP10. It can be a challenge to make a simple interface that presents the most commonly used functions in a direct and intuitive manner, and also allows for deeper editing without becoming too cryptic.

MP3 and all analysis pix located at the share point:

MP3: http://www.mediafire.com/?dlo29l4oo3744uh
PIX: http://www.mediafire.com/?r5q1g75i2wxc7b6

Also, here is an old SOS review that is very positive:
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/May03/articles/gempromega3.asp


Much thanks to Qbert for this interesting DPBSD sample!


Some analysis pix and text review:


Figure 1. Spectral pan view of the first two seconds of the note C4, normalized to -1 dB to bring out detail, Promega3 (left), pRP-800 Steinway(right). Phase signatures are close enough to assume these two DP voices are derived from the same source sample set.


Figure 2. Spectral phase view of the pedal sympathetic resonance test, stimulus removed, normalized to -1 dB to bring out detail, pedal down (left), pedal up (right). The effect sounds subtle and pleasant to my ears, and most audible after the notes have decayed some.


Figure 3. Spectral phase view of the key sympathetic resonance test. First "blob" is the C3 & C4 stimulus plus resonance, two seconds later C1 & C2 are lifted, one second later (at cursor) C5 & C6 are lifted. The effect is audibly subtle (as it is on a real piano).


Figure 4. Waveform view of the looping test with vertical zoom applied. Decay times for the low and mid notes are nice and long.


Figure 5. Waveform view of the note C2 with vertical zoom applied, cursor at end of attack sample. Attack & loop samples are quite clearly seen here, attack is nice and long, loop is very short and static sounding.


Figure 6. Spectral pan view of the stretch test, normalized to -1 dB to bring out detail, mid notes. 44 samples cover 88 notes. Stretch group transitions are audible over the lows and mids.


Figure 7. Spectral frequency view of the layer test. Timber variation is smooth over approximately the upper 2/3 to of the velocity range.


----------------
- GEM Promega3 -
----------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dpbsd_v1.9_gem_promega3.mp3
- Default A1 patch "ST.GRAND1" / "Concert 9' Grand".
- OS updated to the latest available: 1.07
- Sequenced and recorded via Cubase, Behringer UCA222 sound card, Cool Edit for MP3 conversion.
- Recorded by "Qbert".
PROS:
- Passes the pedal sympathetic resonance test, the effect is pleasant sounding.
- Passes the key sympathetic resonance test, strings both lower and higher subtly respond.
- Passes the quick damping test.
- Passes the half pedaling test, the effect is realistically somewhat buzzy.
- Attack samples lengths are very long compared to most other digital pianos.
- No obvious layer switches, most timbre change is in the upper 2/3 velocity range.
CONS:
- Fails the silent replay test @ pedal up.
- Decay times are long for lower notes, a bit short for the highest notes.
- Obviously looped, both visually and audibly, though the long attack samples hide this to some degree.
- Loops are quite short and sound highly processed, could really benefit from longer decay loops.
- Attack sample lengths are (C1:C8): 8.5,8.2,7.3,7.1,4.7,?,?,? seconds.
- Loop sample lengths are (C1:C8): 0.25,0.5,?,?,?,?,?,? seconds.
- Stretching is visible over the entire range, audible over the low end.
- Stretch distances: 1,4,3,2(x4),1,2,1,2,3,3,1(x3),2,3(x3),2,1,2,1,3,1,2,2,2,3,2(x3),3,2,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,2,3 = 44 groups.
- No obvious pedal up/down or key up samples.
- Softly played notes sound somewhat too loud.
OTHER:
- Notes played @ vel=1 produce no sound.
- Dynamic range 24.5dB (vel=1:127).
- MP3 levels: peak @ -11dB, noise floor @ -75dB.
- Date reviewed: 2011-01-23.

RD-700NX Harpsichords SN?

I just tested all the RD-700NX harpsichords in the Live Set front panel presets and none are SN. All are highly stretched. Attacks and loops are very short (<1 to <<1 second).

Bummer.

How about the FP-7F harpsichord? Perhaps you could test that patch (along with the other 'SN' sounds after the first piano sound)?

Cheers
James
x

Gladly. I've got the FP-7F harpsichord in the begging section at the beginning of this thread.

Anyone want to provide a DPBSD MP3 of these?

DPBSD Version 2.0 Released

New tests have been added. There is a new first phase to the pedal sympathetic resonance test, the old last phase of which has been edited as well. This should better reveal pedal as well as other sympathetic resonance. There is a new "Late pedal partial damping test" that tests brief partial damping related to key-off pedal-down timing, and so is more focused on playability. I also added an "Undampered transition test" to see where the dampered / undampered transition is (more for informational purposes than anything else).

The readme file has been changed to reflect these differences, and I added a new section on voice selection / confirmation, as well as some other edits.

Please use this new MIDI file (located in the root directory of the DPBSD share point) instead of all previous versions.

====================
= Revision History =
====================
v2.0 - 2011-02-02:
Readme file edits:
- Added the "Voice Selection / Confirmation" section.
- Edited to reflect MIDI file changes.
MIDI file edits:
- Added additional first phase to the pedal sympathetic resonance test.
- Modified last phase of the pedal sympathetic resonance test to have pedal down @ start and pedal up ~1/2 way thru.
- Changed the name of "Pedal sympathetic resonance test" to "Pedal and other sympathetic resonance test".
- Added "Late pedal partial damping test".
- Added "Undampered transition test".
- Tests 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

Roland RD-700NX Review



Since we own this DP, I'm going to perform this review in pieces and as I find the time to do it. I'll place date markers in the review as appropriate.

A PW thread dedicated to the RD-700NX: LINK
An unboxing pictorial post of our RD-700NX: LINK
SN Piano MIDI playback issues on the RD-700NX:LINK


--------------
- 2011-02-03 -
--------------

Initially, I mainly want people to be aware of the DPBSD v2.0 MP3s now available at the share point:

- DPBSD MP3s -
Concert Grand: http://www.mediafire.com/?kzdvzlmq9btxdu1
Studio Grand: http://www.mediafire.com/?2dgxqc0cdklk13h
Brilliant Grand: http://www.mediafire.com/?5hyz4g5qlvcct8v

I also made a MIDI file which plays a note quickly 8x at increasing velocity so you can hear the timbre variation, and then plays it again at velocity=79 so you can hear the decay detail. All 88 notes are covered - it's a bit monotonous, but if you are interested in this DP you'll get a good idea of what individual notes sound like. The MIDI file is located here:

MIDI: http://www.mediafire.com/?x20vc5fu15gagyn

I ran it over all three basic AP voices in the NX, and the resulting MP3s are also available at the share point:

- Attacks/Decay MP3s -
Concert Grand: http://www.mediafire.com/?r2tnt1owetg4r2u
Studio Grand: http://www.mediafire.com/?19fc6wv9kxbvags
Brilliant Grand: http://www.mediafire.com/?umzoysvfkknkeh8


--------------
- 2011-02-04 -
--------------

This morning I listened closely to the Concert Grand Attack/Decays MP3. I think the note decays in MIDI octave 5 are probably too static sounding. Decays overall sound slightly fake - there is enough random wobble in most of them but they seem a bit too clean or sparse somehow. It's hard to tell how I'll ultimately feel about this after I've become more familiar with the sound, but as of right now I'll take this over the vast majority (probably all) of the looping I've heard while doing this project.

The attacks of the three base pianos (Concert, Studio, Brilliant) look different enough in the phase views to make me believe they are most likely obtained from different pianos.

The pedal-down "loom of strings" sound effect responds to pedal velocity - it's more pronounced the faster you stomp the pedal. What's interesting is that it also responds to half-pedaling - the higher you lift the pedal after stomping it the faster the effect is muted. Too bad you can't hear it via MIDI.

Other Roland SN DPBSD reviews:
HP-307
HP-307
RD-700GX with K-RD700GX1
HP-307 vs K-RD700GX1

Analysis pix for the RD-700NX are now located at the share point:

PIX: http://www.mediafire.com/?cz815yzra535rnv


Some analysis pix and text review:


Figure 1. Spectral pan view of the pedal sympathetic resonance test, stimulus removed, normalized to -1 dB to bring out detail, pedal down (left), pedal up (right). The effect sounds fairly realistic and pleasant to me, though it sounds pretty reverby when turned up.


Figure 2. Spectral frequency view of the key sympathetic resonance test. First "blob" is the C3 & C4 stimulus plus resonance, two seconds later C1 & C2 are lifted (at cursor), one second later C5 & C6 are lifted. The effect is audibly subtle, with both lower and higher notes responding.


Figure 3. Waveform view of the looping test with vertical zoom applied. Decay times are nice and long.


Figure 4. Spectral pan view of the note C2, normalized to -1 dB to bring out detail. Decay is more complex than a simple loop, but less complex looking and perhaps sounding than the real thing.


Figure 5. Spectral pan view of the stretch test, normalized to -1 dB to bring out detail, mid notes. Notes look random, no visible or audible stretching.


Figure 6. Spectral frequency view of the layer test. Timber variation is smooth, with most of the variation happening in the upper 1/2 of the velocity range (as it probably should). The very highest velocities could perhaps use a bit more timbre change.


-------------------
- Roland RD-700NX -
-------------------
FILE & SETUP:
- dpbsd_v2.0_roland_rd-700nx_concert_grand.mp3
- Sonar, Echo MIA MIDI out, DP TRS out, ground isolation box, Echo MIA TRS in, Audition.
- 32 bit WAV => peak normalized to -1dB => MP3.
- Sequenced and recorded by "dewster".
PROS:
- Passes the pedal sympathetic resonance test, the resonance is pleasant sounding.
- Passes the key sympathetic resonance test, strings both lower and higher subtly respond.
- Passes the silent replay test, pedal sympathetic resonance can be heard during it.
- Passes the quick partial damping test.
- Passes the late pedal partial damping test, note decay is caught even after 0.5 seconds.
- Passes the half pedaling test - damping isn't too "buzzy" but sounds real enough.
- Long, fairly natural-sounding note decay (decay times on the order of Pianoteq).
- No visible or audible stretching, notes look random in the wave and phase views.
- No visible or audible layer switches, most timbre change is in the upper 1/2 velocity range.
- Audible duplex scale sympathetic resonance.
- Pedal-down "loom of strings" sound effect responds to pedal velocity & half-pedaling.
- Probably good enough to realistically record solo.
CONS:
- No pedal-down "loom of strings" sound effect via MIDI.
- Duplex scale sympathetic resonance sounds kind of "springy/buzzy" and not very pleasant.
- Pedal sympathetic resonance sounds "reverby" when turned up too high.
- No detectable key-up or pedal-up sound effects.
OTHER:
- Notes played @ vel=1 produce no sound.
- Dynamic range 47.7dB (vel=1:127).
- Dampered | undampered transition: F#6 | G6
- MP3 levels: peak @ -1dB, noise floor @ -84dB.
- Date reviewed: 2011-02-04.


--------------
- 2011-02-11 -
--------------

I assume anyone who is seriously interested in the NX has seen this video, which demonstrates a note cutout issue with the SN pianos during MP3 playback on the NX:

[video:youtube]kNNGiJjPEI4[/video]

I can get the note cut-off thing to happen with only three notes and no pedal when playing back an MP3. I have to play all three notes simultaneously and lift them simultaneously, and I have to do this repeatedly and very quickly. It seems to take 5 notes to produce it when playing back a WAV file.

It's more of a decay stealing thing than a note stealing thing, notes stop abruptly rather than have the damping sound tacked onto the end. Is it serious? Possibly if you play like a demon with MP3 backing a lot. I probably wouldn't have encountered it if I hadn't seen the video. Which doesn't make it right - I'm not a Roland apologist - but I don't think most people will encounter it.

I'm more concerned with damper noise not playing via MIDI. And if I could choose between Roland fixing this decay stealing or them putting in a rudimentary MIDI recorder with MIDI=>WAV rendering capability, I'd pick the latter in a NY minute.

[EDIT:2011-04-03]
- Both the decay stealing and the layered string stealing issues have been very much improved with firmware v1.03. You can still get decay stealing to happen when playing a backing track however.
- Analysis pics zip file & hash location have been changed due to the addition of more pics.