Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Modeling vs Sampling

Is not a big problem, but of course it makes the piano sounds more digital, especially if the loop starts after less than 2 seconds from the attack. Reverb, chorus and resonance effects could make the loop less obvious, but you will lose the clarity and the character of the original sampled note.
If the looped part started after 10 seconds from the attack, we wouldn't even notice the presence of a loop. But that would require much more storage memory for the samples and we know most DP manufacturers are very "stingy" about the amount of storage memory for the samples. I think Dexibell is one of the few (maybe the only) DP manufacturers that makes sample-based piano engines with up to 15 seconds for the attack sound of the lower notes.

Unlooped samples is the only thing PC sample libraries had going for them, while they get everything else wrong. (We have unlooped hardware implementations, too. Not in the mainstream brands though.)


Well, TruePianos 1.0 and Pianoteq 1.0 sound terrible as well.

The CP33 was a 64-polyphony stage piano released in ancient history, when USB to HOST was bleeding edge. We have 2020 now and the CP88 is current.


For acoustic grand piano simulation: Indeed. And the hardware modeling alternatives are also better than what's available as software plugin. If you've had read the entire thread, you would have noticed the OP didn't care at all about comparing outdated software solutions for the umpth time, this is what he wrote coming out of the Kawai thread:

Interesting. Admittedly I have not tried the latest crop of Kawai DP yet, but I was not expecting this from the Progressive Harmonic Imaging the CN37 and current CN39 have. Why? Because one of the pluses of the top of the line Harmonic Imaging XL (HI-XL) is the eXtra Long samples. I guess that's another reason to go to the Kawai dealer, in addition to testing the NV-5 (even though I cannot afford it)

So let me rephrase my comment with

All digital pianos I have tried have such short sustains that the point is moot for slow playing, including the one I own, the NU1. And let me be even more specific, to avoid contributing to blanket statements which are plaguing this thread: stopwatch in hand, I measured sustain with PianoTeq (demo) being about the same as my golden era grand, and twice as long as the default NU1 engine.

Fair point, it is old tech.



That would be an opinion, and not that I have tried all dp's, but I disagree. Especially after having experience with vsl synchron piano's, I highly doubt there are dp's that can compare, sampling technology wise.

Well, threads evolve beyond what the OPs intend. This one had a quite lengthy discussion about BBQ, pizza and liquor... so I guess what we are discussing here is still on topic.

Anyway, interesting hearing about your point of view. I have not tried any of the software samplers myself (because they do not have demos, and I dislike shelling out non-refundable money for something I don't know if I like or not), so I can't express my judgment on that part. But I can tell that PianoTeq (demo) pianos sound marginally better than internal NU1 engine, when played via the same speakers (NU1 ones, with line-in input). To be more specific, by "marginally better" I mean "sounds closer to the sound of an acoustic piano, and less to a 'digital fake', particularly for pathological situation, such as parallel octaves, e.g. Hanon exercises (not that I care about that, just being clear on what I mean)". You may claim that the NU1 is not the NU1x, and that's fair....

On the other hand, if what you say is correct, why many people buy those software pianos when they own the "better" internal sound engine in their instruments which they use as a controller? Maybe just because of updates? E.g. should I have decided to buy PianoTeq, I could update to the current version for $39, whereas updating NU1 to NU1x is thousands? Or perhaps for the flexibility? With PianoTeq I could alter everything I want (e.g. voicing), whereas with the NU1 I'm stuck with the fairly bright Yamaha sound?

Last, but not least, can you provide some specific comparisons e.g. brand and model of piano being better (in what sense) than particular software piano? I'm especially interested if you can compare with Garritan.

Thanks!

It's true that the HI-XL has longer samples, but the duration of the sustain is independent of the sample length, because the piano engine can make the looped sustained part long/short almost as you want.

Yes, I must agree with you!


I think my subjective preference for Garritan instead of Pianoteq is because I find Garritan's piano tone more realist and beautiful. Also, its ambience (which is the real ambience of the studio where the piano was recorded) makes me feel like I'm in a hall playing, and it is also very suitable to recording. But, if I had the money, I'd buy Pianoteq also, since I realize the advantages it has, especially for practicing and getting a more accurate modeling of the physical behaviour of the piano. But I needed a VST for recording, so having the most recording-like sound was the priority for me.

It is subjective in the sense that different products are here to serve to different needs.

The most controller in use by those guys is the Kawai VPC1 controller, which doesn't have any internal sound engine.


Many people praising broken software like Garritan CFX are completely unfamiliar with Yamaha's own implementation of their own concert grand, which is far superior especially when it comes to "play-ability". Anything else would be pretty embarrassing for the market leader.

That usually comes up with the spiel that you have to sacrifice sound for play-ability or "treat digital pianos as their own specialy gifted instruments", while being completely oblivious to the fact, that technologies like Yamaha TransAcoustic or Kawai AURES exist.

Again, this would be an opinion, not a fact.

Also, it is interesting that some people with n1x's, nv10's and others, choose to use (broken?) software libraries such as garritans or vsl's, instead of using the build in piano sounds.

It’s also interesting that N1X owners tend to believe the N1X is better; whilst NV-10 owners are most certain that the NV-10 is better. I wonder why this happens?

And Garritan owners believe that's the best, while Pianoteq owners... It's almost if there is a bias for the product where you just left a substential amount of money. Someone should make a study about that...

Also MY totally unbiased opinion is that the Clavinova 675 with Pianoteq or the Ravenscroft 275 are UNDENIABLE the best things you can get. (And that's 100% not related to the fact that I own these products :D).

I have the Garritan CFX. Do I think it's the best? No.
I have Pianoteq demo. Do I think it's the best? No.
I have the Grandeur. Do I think it's the best? No.
I have several dozen others. Do I think any of them are best? No ... with one exception. The Vintage D is my best.

So the notion that if someone owns X then X he deems X to be best ... doesn't hold for me.

This is partially obvious (one would not buy something they think is bad) and partially known psychological fact (coping with buyer's remorse, check it on wikipedia). The kind of answers I was looking with my question was the one matschulat wrote about. Thanks a lot for that matschulat!

Let me answer myself for others who might be interested. I bought my NU1 because I found it second hand from a friend at a steal price and it has much better action than the very old Kawai CA it replaced. I did not pay attention to the sound and I actually don't like too much the sound of either instruments (but I do liked that the sound from CA was somewhat customizable, whereas the NU1 sound is not). After the comments by Seb, I am actually not paying attention to the "I don't like the sound" anymore. and instead I am paying attention to the "what I can do better with this sound". And I'm already pleased with the (slight) improvements I'm seeing in my playing, because after all, that is what matters to me.

Thanks

Well, I drive a Kia Picanto, but still I think a Porche Carrera would be better.

To make this answer useful to others (please see my previous posts for details), can you kindly elaborate on what do you like (or not) of each one (if anything) and why that one is best for you?

So thinks Belastingdienst as well!

Well most likely you are still convinced that this Kia was the best option for you and have reasons why that is so.

It’s called „post purchase rationalization“ and pretty well researched. Unless you have a case of buyers remorse, that also happens more often then one might think.

Funny enough though, a coping mechanism for buyers remorse is again rationalization of the purchase, so it can lead to the same thing: Overlooking of obvious flaws of a single purchase.

With piano VSTs ... I generally don't suffer from post-purchase rationalization.

Nor do I have buyer's remorse ... at least not initially.

But I almost always have reservations about a VST ... which evolves into remorse ... which leads me to the next VST purchase. It's a GAS GAS GAS.

You know JoeT, you seem to be talking a lot of **** and saying programs like Garritan are "broken", but I don't see you giving any details to validate that contrarian stance.

That will explain the amount of VSTs you listed before ^^. Really not one that could keep your fancy?