Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards V Piano Successor anytime soon?

They don't ...

You links are some university research and even they admit their results are crappy ...

It is true ... there is no current (or planned) commercially available piano that does it like that.
All current modelling is done based on modelling the generated waveforms of the instrument using synthisis and then modelling the articulations (using a similar method to which you describe) or in the case of electronic instruments and effects by circuit modelling which is very easy to do these days.

Beware the bull$hit marketing hype.

According to this Pianoteq tutorial even the initial waveform is just a sine wave generated by the computer/program itself. The only samples in Pianoteq (AFAICS) is the pedal noise, which has nothing to do with the actual piano sound.

But this IS modelling, isn't it?......just not modelling in the highest, purest sense of the word where each physical component is broken down into a mathematical proposition (or something very elegant, like that).

Perhaps it's better to see the systems on a continuum with subtractive synthesis at one end and pure physical modelling at the other. Additive synthesis would be somewhat to the left, SN somewhere in the middle and Pianoteq & Roland V somewhat to the right.

One day, there will be pure physical modelling, commercially available (or not).

But in any case, it's what comes out of the speakers that matters, not how pure you are.

The V-piano would have been a sales success if they hand given it a full grand-piano action, if they had given it better midi functionality and had they produced presets that were tweaked to get the best out of the modeled pianos rather than factory presets. If roland had produced an optimum speaker system, I think they could have charged the RRP price of $6000 if they included the speakers & the stand along with good headphones.

The Roland guys who decided on the PHIII action for the V-piano made a huge marketing mistake because many serious pianists who wanted a realistic practice instrument went ahead and purchased the Avant Grand instead. Roland could have killed the Avant Grand off; Roland have only themselves to blame for the v-piano sales failure.

As it is now, I think the Roland V-piano is going to be surpassed by Pianoteq version 7 or 8.

So what should Roland do?

If I was them, I'd consider 2 options:
1) Produce a Roland version of Pianoteq, and keep updating it with new instruments and upgraded piano modeling improvements; also, produce a controller keyboard with a real grand-piano action to compete with the MP11/VPC1...
2) Produce a V-piano 2 with the following:
a) Full grand piano action
b) Improved grand piano modeling
c) Include more modeled sounds and allow the instrument to combine modeled sounds and maybe split points..

The key to option 2 would be to include a speaker system and stand in the price (if they are going to charge $6000), and to make sure that the new modeled instruments are better than competitor offerings e.g., better than Korg's modeled mark II Rhodes etc...

In summary:

If you're producing an instrument that doesn't beat all the competitors, offer a lower starting price such as $3000.

If you're going to produce a modeled grand piano has everything (best sound, best action, best response & multiple piano types along with custom speaker systems and stand), then you can reasonably charge $6000.

This was also how I understand it. Anyway, even if they use some waveform or precalculated tables as the base for the number crunching, given than compleate Pianoteq download is something like 20 MB (IIRC) and it can sound like a dozen different pianos (K2, U4, D2, Bluetner, Clavichord, historic pianos, etc) then size of the initial waveforms (and / or tables) has to be very small.

It is my understanding that strings, dampers, hammers, etc, are modeled... maybe even the soundboard. I would call that physical modelling.

What I can say is that the behavior of it is closer to an acoustic than any sampled-based piano I've tried. The sound is not closer, though.

Unfortunately I never had the opportunity to try a V-Piano, to see how it compares to Pianoteq... but it never was in my radar because of the price.

Regards,
Kurt.-

I don't see Roland using a real grand piano action any time soon. They don't make grand pianos, so they'd have to pay a third party to build it for them; this will cost them big bucks. Kawai, on the other hand, could build a hybrid, and perhaps price it lower than the AvantGrand; however, many believe Kawai will not go that route.

Taking your quote out of context, Kawai already build a hybrid. They claim; see the CA95 marketing blurb.

You're right; they call these (CA95/CS10) hybrids. So we're stuck with Yamaha if we want a real grand piano action.

A company that makes as much as Roland does could easily purchase a second hand MP11 & Avant Grand for the purposes of learning how to make a "real grand piano" action for a digital. They don't have to re-invent the wheel, just learn the mechanics and principles, and design something similar.

However, I don't see them doing that either. I think the V-piano (and also the RD-1000 before it) was Roland flexing their tech departments to come up with something impressive i.e., similarly to how Bugatti produced the Veyron. If they were really interested in the V-piano as a long-term project, they'd have priced it competitively to begin with & continued with the updates.

I do like the idea of releasing the V-piano as a virtual piano competing with Pianoteq though: they could make allot more money: clearly the V-piano modeling is a step or two ahead of Pianoteq 5 in terms of quality.

Why don't they just release the V-Piano as it is now, but at a proper competitive price? Keep it as a hardware instrument, make up an excuse (about being a reduced data set or something - or slimmer interface) to sell it cheaper, and sell it as a DP - or a hybid along with SN?

Wouldn't that be the way to make the most money?.....maybe not..after all it was Microsoft and not Apple Mac who won all the prizes from about 1978 to 2000.

Making a close copy of another manufacturers action won't serve us well though will it? Sure we can adapt. I know our engineers do not lack the expertise to make a "real grand piano action." There are a lot more factors at play here, besides the ability to do so. I think what we have right now in the PHA-4 serves really well. Many players agree. The mechanics and principles you speak of are implemented in the PHA-4. You're just getting lost in the specification and parts count.

More parts doesn't automatically equal better feel. Nor does just using wood...It's the combination of the action and the connection to the sound engine, that makes the overall package "grand like". When the piano can go from ppp to fff seamlessly, and the player can just pull what they want out of it, then the parts hidden in the cabinet are of far less importance.

Don't get lost in specs. When it comes time to play, if the instrument speaks to you, and the action provides a seamless connection to the sound engine. The materials used in the key action mean nothing.

Jay

How time flies.....my V-piano is 4 years old, as am I - well, in PW.

And it still looks, and plays, like it did on the day I single-handedly set it up on its stand (nearly crippling myself in the process - thank goodness for my 15 years of weight-training).

Would its action still be as good now, if it had Yamaha's hybrid action? I doubt it, considering the amount of pummelling it's been subjected to. I didn't buy a DP in order to have to get its action serviced regularly like that of an acoustic.

But more importantly, there's still no DP like it today, with the kind of responsiveness and immediacy that can make you forget that you're playing a machine.

BTW, my laptop is a Mac. And my iPod is also an Apple.....

Might I hazard a guess that these two items were made some time after the turn of the millennium? If so, I humbly (but triumphantly ) rest my case.

I think your comments are fair enough, it's not good to directly copy the Yamaha Avant Grand action. However, Roland engineers could learn the principles and apply them to your own design. If you get the action spot on, I don't think customers will care how you achieved that.

Jay, I hope you can appreciate the following constructive feedback---paraphrasing from a friend of mine who owns a digital piano store & is himself a keen pianist:

"We just can't sell enough V-pianos, so we don't stock them anymore: the PHIII action is way below the standard of the Avant Grand, therefore it's way too expensive for that action. Due to the fact that the factory presets need tweaking to make the V-piano sound realistic, most of our customers who would consider spending $6000 on a digital grand piano don't want to be bothered programming the sounds to make the instrument hum: they are players not techies. Also Roland make you shelve out for headphones, a stand and speakers for the V-piano. They don't even suggest a speaker set up. The Avant Grand is one package which is much more attractive to most pianists i.e., despite it's inferior sound and response! Sure, techies love the V-piano, but they're a very small fraction of our customers"

Personally, I love tweaking sounds. If you were making a new V-piano, I'd be put off purchasing one if you left out the tweaking functions ;-). However, it's not most pianists 'cup of tea'.



The consensus concerning the PHIV action---from blogs & friends who have played the various competing actions---is that the PHIV action is second place behind the Avant Grand & GF action of Kawai's: because of the Yamaha's/Kawai's longer key travel. I don't think serious pianists would mind if the upgraded V-piano were a bit deeper to accommodate a longer key travel.

I wouldn't be a potential customer of the V-piano II if Roland engineers/marketers decided to put the PHIV action from the RD800 directly into the V-piano II as is. Do you think that the Roland engineers could modify the PHIV action to match the GF and Avant Grand actions for use in a V-piano II?



I totally agree with you: I don't think customers would care what the parts were made of, so long as it felt like playing a real grand piano action that was robust (long lasting). The seamless connection to the sound engine is the V-pianos best feature.

You admit owning a computer now then?!

Doug, have you actually played a V-Piano? It isn't clear from your posts. I'm not usually given to defending the V-Piano but I don't think its action is a problem in reality. In perception perhaps but not in reality. There are other issues Roland needs to deal with on the V-Piano (I'm not going to go there).

You might be confusing key travel with lever length. The significant measurement is from key front to pivot point, not necessarily total key length. I think the Roland PHA actions are broadly competitive in this sense.

While I personally feel the AvantGrand has a more substantial feel (as does the Kawai wooden action) and a real (and satisfying) sense of mechanics going on beneath your fingers I couldn't possibly say that the Roland action lacks anything in terms of agility (quite the opposite in fact).

Are your posts based on your reaction to or understanding of current marketing/demos/other peoples' opinions or personal experience of playing these pianos (V/AG/Kawai)?

It's probably a marketing thing. Many firms use a method known as conjoint analysis for determining which features to add to a product to get maximum sales return. These days, analogy modeling is also used: i.e., finding an older product which has the features you're thinking of including in your new product and looking at the older products fared.

There is always going to be a trade off between cost of designing and including attributes in a product and overall benefit in terms of product demand.

Roland seemed to have targeted the high end instrument market serving classical/jazz pianists i.e., who want an instrument for their home or studio that could replace an expensive grand piano e.g., great action, response and sound.

Sure, they could've added SN sounds, or allowed the instrument to play it's on board GM sounds; however, perhaps market research determined that most pianists wouldn't appreciate having sampled sounds on the V-piano, so it wouldn't represent a substantial cost-benefit. So the question is this: how many extra customers would Roland attract to a new V-piano light, if they included the SN sound engine versus not including it and releasing a newer version of the V-piano for the high end market? On the original V-piano, maybe the market research was wrong, maybe not.

With the Pianoteq software now including modeled Rhodes and clavi's, I suspect the V-piano II would require those modeled EP's to compete.

In contrast, would gigging musicians buy the V-piano as it stands? It weighs a tonne and is a single purpose instrument. Gigging pianists might buy a light weight stage-piano or workstation e.g., KronosX, Kurzweil Artis/Forte, Yamaha's CP4, the RD800 etc, so as not to need two instruments.

At present, I believe that the biggest seller in gigging stage-pianos is the Nord Stage 2 HA88: it's lightweight, has a great sampled piano and all the things a stage-pianist might need. When you're playing in a band, you need the piano to cut through the noise of the rest of the band: the Nord does this as well as the V-piano mono setting, but weighs 41 lbs compared to the V-piano's 84 lbs. 4 oz.

When modeled sounds are ubiquitous and equal to gigabyte samples, I'm sure such an instrument will be built.

Oh yes, I decided to join the 20th (or is it 21st?) century last year, and treated myself to a Christmas/New Year's present by ordering a Mac on 29/12/12 (to be precise), after sending off for Which?'s free guide to laptops. It was delivered on 2/1/13 (precisely).

(Seemingly, all the Apple laptops were 'Best Buys' regardless of price.....)

It would be a shame not to have an iPod as well (not to mention the fact that my ancient Sony Walkman cassette player had given up the ghost), so I also bought an iPod Touch a few months later. But it wouldn't hold all the music I wanted, so I also bought a Classic soon after. But its 160GB is still too limiting, so I'm waiting for a 320GB version......(I hope Apple is listening ).

So, ever since, I can post on PW at any time, rather than when I'm at work or at the gym as I used to.

You admit to owning a Walkman - a cassette one at that! Showing your age there....