 |
Welcome to the Piano World Piano Forums
Over 3 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments.
Over 100,000 members from around the world.
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!
|
|
|
|
37 members (8ude, accordeur, danno858, David Boyce, David B, 8 invisible),
1,478
guests, and
93
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,325
3000 Post Club Member
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,325 |
In a blind test I think you'd have to be some kind of a freak to pick that Ivory wasn't a real recording. The real one does sound more ambient - not sure whether it's just mic'ing, or due to sympathetic resonance though.
Greg.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 457
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 457 |
When I downloaded and compared the mp3s posted by computerpro3, my first reaction was, "well the pianist didn't get it right or he played the Steinway and sample versions differently.
Of course I had read the credentials of computerpro3, and realized that this could not have been the case.
What I find very believable about Ivory (or any other good sample set) is the sound they produce, but what is not realistic to my ears is how very often a note or notes will stand out as being wrong (loudness and timbre).
At about 2:46 of the Steinway version and 2:49.6 of the Ivory version there is a quiet passage. In the Steinway version there is a gradual and smooth crescendo - in the Ivory version it is rather abrupt, and there are notes that "stick out like a sore thumb" so to speak. It's as though the pianist is a beginner and can't control the loudness of all the notes - but of course this is ridiculous because when he plays the Steinway it's quite different.
While I'm definitely barely at the so-so amateur stage, I was born to a piano teacher mother, and grew up with piano sounds from the beginning of my life, and have played only acoustics for 44 years. Even if I don't know the piece, I find discontinuities or irregularities quite noticeable.
Invariably when I listen to a sample rendering this is what I notice and what gives it away.
There is an excellent classical pianist on the Pianoteq site, and this is what he has found with samples - the loudness doesn't always correspond to what he is playing. His rendition of Rhapsody in Blue is posted on a sample site as a demo, and he has said that after he recorded the midi, considerable editing was done to the MIDI file so that the sample rendering would sound believable.
Glenn
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,946
3000 Post Club Member
|
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,946 |
Glenn - can you link us to these discussions on the pianoteq forum?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 7,268
7000 Post Club Member
|
|
7000 Post Club Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 7,268 |
From a playability point of view Pianoteq may be the greatest of all piano softwares for the reasons described but that Rhapsody in Blue recording has a sound that I will not describe as acoustic piano with arm on my heart. This is something I am always experiencing with Pianoteq - initially it sounds very promising but when I listen for more than 30 seconds it makes me feel it's not piano at all, rather a cheap synth toy. That must be some weird psychoacoustic phenomenon but I feel disgust whenever I listen to Pianoteq recordings for more than a minute.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 840
500 Post Club Member
|
|
OP
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 840 |
When I downloaded and compared the mp3s posted by computerpro3, my first reaction was, "well the pianist didn't get it right or he played the Steinway and sample versions differently.
Of course I had read the credentials of computerpro3, and realized that this could not have been the case.
What I find very believable about Ivory (or any other good sample set) is the sound they produce, but what is not realistic to my ears is how very often a note or notes will stand out as being wrong (loudness and timbre).
At about 2:46 of the Steinway version and 2:49.6 of the Ivory version there is a quiet passage. In the Steinway version there is a gradual and smooth crescendo - in the Ivory version it is rather abrupt, and there are notes that "stick out like a sore thumb" so to speak. It's as though the pianist is a beginner and can't control the loudness of all the notes - but of course this is ridiculous because when he plays the Steinway it's quite different.
While I'm definitely barely at the so-so amateur stage, I was born to a piano teacher mother, and grew up with piano sounds from the beginning of my life, and have played only acoustics for 44 years. Even if I don't know the piece, I find discontinuities or irregularities quite noticeable.
Invariably when I listen to a sample rendering this is what I notice and what gives it away.
There is an excellent classical pianist on the Pianoteq site, and this is what he has found with samples - the loudness doesn't always correspond to what he is playing. His rendition of Rhapsody in Blue is posted on a sample site as a demo, and he has said that after he recorded the midi, considerable editing was done to the MIDI file so that the sample rendering would sound believable.
Glenn This is exactly how I felt as a performer. If anything, the live Steinway "should" be less controlled, as it was recorded during a live performance at my Junior recital and it was the first piece of the night. Nerves should make the playing worse vs. the Ivory, which was recorded in the comfort of my own home with no pressure whatsoever. However, that's not the case because you just can't control Ivory the way you can a real piano. The actual samples are quite good as you said, but I can't actually play it realistically. This may be completely unfair to say, but I would wager that a good portion of people that work with and practice on digital instruments do so because their living arrangements make it impossible to have extensive playing time on acoustic instruments. I would guess that after a while they may "forget" the acoustic sound and become accustomed to the digital sound and touch, which is why many people do not notice the problems with Ivory and other software pianos.
Last edited by computerpro3; 05/20/10 11:32 AM.
Shigeru Kawai SK7
Kawai NV10S
Hallet & Davis 165
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,070
1000 Post Club Member
|
|
1000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,070 |
From a playability point of view Pianoteq may be the greatest of all piano softwares for the reasons described but that Rhapsody in Blue recording has a sound that I will not describe as acoustic piano with arm on my heart. This is something I am always experiencing with Pianoteq - initially it sounds very promising but when I listen for more than 30 seconds it makes me feel it's not piano at all, rather a cheap synth toy. That must be some weird psychoacoustic phenomenon but I feel disgust whenever I listen to Pianoteq recordings for more than a minute. This is also my impression. The first couple of notes sound quite impressing, but then... I can't stand playing Pianoteq for a longer period of time. I couldn't describe it betterthan you. That'S the reason why I tried to combine it with a sampled piano sound, and WOOSH, that's quite a difference! Now the resonance effects and the long decay can be enjoyed, just because the overall sound signature is more realistic and not artificial at all.
<~ don't test forever - play and enjoy! ~>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 172
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 172 |
I would guess that after a while they may "forget" the acoustic sound and become accustomed to the digital sound and touch, which is why many people do not notice the problems with Ivory and other software pianos. Interesting observation. That may explain the diversity of opinion. It seems almost inexplicable that some users can state that there should be no detectable switching and that a simple adjustment in the velocity curves can cure it. And others almost "jump out of their skin" with the granularity of the layering. I think familiarity allows a pianist to subconsciously work around the granularity. No need for midi tinkering, the brain does it in realtime, effortlessly.
Last edited by NikkiPiano; 05/20/10 11:57 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 840
500 Post Club Member
|
|
OP
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 840 |
I would guess that after a while they may "forget" the acoustic sound and become accustomed to the digital sound and touch, which is why many people do not notice the problems with Ivory and other software pianos. Interesting observation. That may explain the diversity of opinion. It seems almost inexplicable that some users can state that there should be no detectable switching and that a simple adjustment in the velocity curves can cure it. And others almost "jump out of their skin" with the granularity of the layering. I think familiarity allows a pianist to subconsciously work around the granularity. No need for midi tinkering, the brain does it in realtime, effortlessly. Exactly; I mean after a couple of hours on the digital I can even detect myself starting to do the same. I'm essentially learning to play the digital piano, which I have to be very careful with because the whole point of getting a digital was to increase my practice time so I could play the real piano better. As long as I play on both everyday, which I do, the digital is a valuable tool as it enables me to learn notes much quicker (I can sneak in a hour before bed, right in the morning, etc). It is not, however, a replacement in sound, touch, feel, or expressive ability. As long as people realize this than that's great, but some of the hype surrounding things needs to be taken in proper context so people don't get overly excited as I did. It's just not fair to people to recommend $400 non returnable, non-sellable software on the basis that "it plays just like a real piano", which is something I've seen said about Ivory hundreds of times - not just on this forum, but all over the internet.
Last edited by computerpro3; 05/20/10 12:04 PM.
Shigeru Kawai SK7
Kawai NV10S
Hallet & Davis 165
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5 |
Hello, Which settings had you on the controller for dynamic curves sent to Ivory? I could go wrong but hearing your mp3s seems to me that dynamic curves on your Kawai were not "your" curves against Ivory. Maybe you tried different settings and my post makes no sense  I experienced issues on controlling pianos and other instruments from my mk (MC 2000) several times, also with pianoteq. Often a linear response on the master and variations of pianoteq settings did not help much. Example: heavy curve worked perfectly (related to "that" kind of sound) with the motif rack es full grand, same setting on pianoteq lead me to a similar result of your mp3s, "flatted" response with not-so consistent dynamics. I varied the curve on extra heavy on the master and made linear on pianoteq and i discovered a very different response and playability. I don't know your Kawai model but maybe you could play (if you have not done yet) with your settings giving more importance to the curve of the keyboard versus the software settings. Just my 2c. 1st post: hello to this inspiring forum Ant
Last edited by Anthares; 05/20/10 05:44 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 19,500
10K Post Club Member
|
|
10K Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 19,500 |
Indeed, does adjusting the CA51's Touch Curve (and User Touch) settings have any influence over the dynamics produced by Ivory?
It would seem that the two need to be calibrated in some way.
Cheers,
James
x
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,325
3000 Post Club Member
|
|
3000 Post Club Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,325 |
At about 2:46 of the Steinway version and 2:49.6 of the Ivory version there is a quiet passage. In the Steinway version there is a gradual and smooth crescendo - in the Ivory version it is rather abrupt, and there are notes that "stick out like a sore thumb" so to speak. It's as though the pianist is a beginner and can't control the loudness of all the notes - but of course this is ridiculous because when he plays the Steinway it's quite different.
I've listened to both, and all I would have said is that they sound different. I would have had no idea whatsoever that the performer didn't intend to play the Ivory as it is, because I am not intimately familiar with the work. Also, I did notice immediately when I first heard Ivory that the notes sort of stand out more - I put this down to possibly closer mic'ing. Btw, I think it is possible for sampled pianos to have good playability, even without a very high layer count or layer blending. (I have a few that I consider to be very good - certainly much better than EWQLP, which I also have. I do not have Ivory) Greg.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 34
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 34 |
I looked thru this, couldbt find anything about the hardware youre running..If I missed that, sorry..but the hardware or computer makes a lot of difference, also standalone or if your using it thru a DAW, what type of soundcar/interface.
And the posts about some people only having the room etc for a DP or SW piano is quite true.
I owned a Steinway for 25 years, but due to situations like some mentioned, I no longer have it.
But w/ a good DP or SW piano w/a good controller, its makes a lot of difference to some.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 76
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 76 |
But, when I layered it with the built-in piano on my Yamaha P-250 I got a really good sound, much better than either one alone.
Wow. Lucky. Typically layering pianos doesn't work do to tuning issues, resulting in unwanted flanging, chorusing effect. I don't have a problem with that as long as I turn off Stretch Tuning on both. BTW, even though the result "sounds good", it doesn't sound quite like a real piano. I've had to adjust my expectations a little. It does sound a lot like a recording of a real piano.
Baldwin L - Rhodes 73
Yamaha P250 - Nord NP88
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 89
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 89 |
In a blind test I think you'd have to be some kind of a freak to pick that Ivory wasn't a real recording. The real one does sound more ambient - not sure whether it's just mic'ing, or due to sympathetic resonance though.
Greg. Personally, I thought he mixed up the 2 versions. Listening in my project studio, the Ivory version sounds better to me. FWIW in the original package, the C7/C8 are the best sounding pianos. For heavy classical work the Italian Grand is best. I play jazz so bear that in mind <smile>! Also I agree with the other person about layering and flanging and additionally other types of phase problems. You got real lucky !! I think a lot of theory gets tossed around and sometimes the actual sound and playability gets lost in the theory. Just my 2 cents and it's great to see other opinions because there is no best piano, acoustic or electronic.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 210
Full Member
|
|
Full Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 210 |
computerpro3 have you tried changing the velocity curves? there are two curves one curve is on your kawai, you should be able to use something called a "user touch curve" you will want to set that curve and then also set something called "velocity" from ivory.
It's quite possible that ivory won't suit your needs, you might need to switch to either east west quantum leap or the sapmletekk black grand.
You can tweak and tweak but might find after all you'd be better off with a different sample set.
Of course even though these samples are all steinways, the different samples perform as differently as an upright from a grand.
I'm not into the grand pianos myself, I like singing to pop tunes along to my piano, so recently I've been using alicia key's piano, and it's such a delight to play pop tunes on, it's got great responsiveness.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 824
500 Post Club Member
|
|
500 Post Club Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 824 |
Indeed, does adjusting the CA51's Touch Curve (and User Touch) settings have any influence over the dynamics produced by Ivory?
It would seem that the two need to be calibrated in some way.
x Yes, it has. At least with my Kawai CP136. With "heavy 1" I get better control for ppp and pp levels. I mostly use that. I looked to the MIDI code that the inbuild piano demos produce. With a normal level of playing (I think that is mezzoforte) they produce velocity 64. I adjust velocity in Synthogy this way that mezzo forte playing produces 50% of max volume. I think that is the best adjustment. It seems that synthogys curves are calibrated quite nonlinear. It should also be said, that Galaxy pianos have a freeform velocity curve. That is one of the reasons why I prefer them. (The other reason is sound and control over sound) But I hadnt to adjust anything with galaxy. The default linear curve works for me together with "heavy 1" for the Kawai keyboard. Previously, when I had a Yamaha CVP96 I had problems with fortissimo. In the mf-fff range the keys where too sensitive. Thats much better, if not ideal with the Kawai keyboard. BTW, have you seen the official Synthogy II demonstrations (from NAMM) on Youtube? They use a MP8 II for that..... Peter
Last edited by hpeterh; 05/24/10 05:47 PM.
1929 Galaxy Blüthner Baby Grand
acer aspire m3300 AMD Phenom II X6
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 19,500
10K Post Club Member
|
|
10K Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 19,500 |
BTW, have you seen the official Synthogy II demonstrations (from NAMM) on Youtube? They use a MP8 II for that..... In the clips I watched I couldn't tell if it was an MP8 or MP8II (newer action on the II, although some prefer the action on the original model). Either way, it's clear that - despite its maturity - the MP8/MP8II is still one of the best controllers on the market.  Cheers, James x
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,218
5000 Post Club Member
|
|
5000 Post Club Member
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,218 |
"...Constructing a realistic fake piano is apparently a "standing on the shoulders of giants" thing. It takes a very special breed of engineer to design and build these kinds of products in ways that will satisfy those with intimate knowledge of how an acoustic piano plays and sounds. But, due to the general secrecy of industry, good methods get lost, ignorance springs eternal with each new crop from college, and suddenly the pedal doesn't work right on our latest DP or SWP...."
This is a little frightening to someone who just bought a DP... though I think you're probably just about right.
"...it's clear that - despite it's maturity - the MP8/MP8II is still one of the best controllers on the market."
I'm still trying to decode the MP8II manual (and another one from Tascam), but it's reassuring to hear you say so. You have to buy a DP for what it is--- an instrument in its own right, and not for what it isn't--- an AP. I'm pretty happy with the action, like the piano sounds quite well, have figured out where to plug in the headphones... and the pedals work.
Figuring out which new computer to buy, which DAW, and which software instrument package is a migraine for another day.
Clef
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 19,500
10K Post Club Member
|
|
10K Post Club Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 19,500 |
I'm still trying to decode the MP8II manual (and another one from Tascam), but it's reassuring to hear you say so. Well, admittedly, I may be slightly biased... However, the MP8/MP8II is undoubtedly a popular instrument among the MIDI/software piano community - seeing the chaps from Synthogy using one to demo their latest package surely reinforces this. Cheers, James x
|
|
|
|
Forums43
Topics228,457
Posts3,405,495
Members114,972
| |
Most Online15,252
Mar 21st, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
