Glenn *Gould* recorded Bach's 2-part inventions on a grand piano that had a broken mechanism such that one of the strings would be struck twice for a given note - I think it may have been a b-flat - instead of the usually sufficient once. In the liner notes to the album he claimed to enjoy the effect. So I would never assume one way or the other about what sounds someone will want coming out of their instrument!
The other Glenn and I are both Canucks (well - he WAS), however, he wasn't completely stable from a mental point of view. People like to use the word "eccentric", but I think that' being very kind.
G
]]>What's so musical about the thunk of a pedal or a key hitting the key bed? Do the rubbing noises of a piano action really give anyone pleasure?
Glenn
Glenn *Gould* recorded Bach's 2-part inventions on a grand piano that had a broken mechanism such that one of the strings would be struck twice for a given note - I think it may have been a b-flat - instead of the usually sufficient once. In the liner notes to the album he claimed to enjoy the effect. So I would never assume one way or the other about what sounds someone will want coming out of their instrument!
]]>I really like the sound of 88 notes all singing together in total disharmony. How sweet it is.
Surprisingly the sound hasn't been included in any piano sonatas by the likes of Beethoven.
G
Oh, Glenn, you hit the magic posts number! Mario should be along to give you a prize!!!
]]>
Surprisingly the sound hasn't been included in any piano sonatas by the likes of Beethoven.
G
]]>What's so musical about the thunk of a pedal...
Glenn
Hm.... in a grand piano it's possible to open up the hole piano just by press the pedal (sustain) fast. When you do that you can hear more than just a "thunk", you can just with this fast press on the pedal get all the strings to sound at ones! Actually, I kind of miss this in pianoteq... In pianoteq you can have the same feeling if you increase "sympathetic resonance" and than play some notes, then the piano will "open up" in a similar way, but on a real grand it's enough to press the pedal fast...
]]>CM:
... Considering how much work it is to get any sound at all, I was quite impressed.
Glenn
Yes, I agree.
How many piano software are now employing physical modelling in some shape or form: V-Piano, GEM, Pianoid, Pianissimo (hybrid sampled), Truepiano (?), any others? why not add Myosis to the list? I'm sure this list will continue to grow. My old computer can't deal with the demand of a good multi gigabyte sampled set such as Ivory. So I welcome the direction of physical modelling. Even if Pianoteq were to doubled the amount of coding into the software it will still be considerably smaller that those multi gigabyte sets.
From another angle, if a top tier piano builder used a different material tomorrow that eliminated (not just muffled better) these sounds would we "buy into it" ?
I get enough extraneous sounds from my (also less than perfect) electronic keyboard, they are DIFFERENT to the mechanical sounds from physical pianos, but they are there.
I wouldn't want them "emulated" in the next generation of electronic keyboards.So, if I have another point it is that the effort that goes into these sounds could probably be better spent.
Steinway tried tried teflon bushings on the pins that hold the keys in place on the key bed. They're back to felt (the teflon made more noise!!).
Kawai's Millenium action utilizes carbon fibre for many moving parts - better precision in manufacturing and more stable than wood.
In the sixties or seventies, one low end builder tried plywood for the soundboard - it was a dud.
And I'm sure there will be more attempts - but there is resistance to change (it's a human nature thing), that seems to be stronger in the classical music genre - and that's where the really good and very expensive pianos are used.
So I don't hold out much hope that these noises will be eliminated anytime soon.
Glenn
]]>What caused negative comments in my opinions is the fact that the author implicitly suggested his product is better than Pianoteq. Has he said it was a product in development, he would have received better comments.
Of course , pianoteq sound real and mine as a pianotoy. It's an evidence. I'm just working on a piano model on my nord modular G2.
Will post a sound demo just to give an idea However, my G2 patch seems to be in a better direction than my vst pianotoy ( a substractive synth can't be very realistic as physical modeling, of course, my g2 patch use digital waveguide and is more realistic but far from pianoteq.
I found just funny the reaction of some people. It's like talking to religious fanatics. And for those who judge my personality , thinking I'm searching for friends or customers : I don't care ! I'm not selling my ass, or searching for virtual friends , sorry. I'm having fun trying to make a virtual piano and there is no commercial reasons about my presence here. Who would buy here a cheap piano? Doesn't make sense. It doesn't matter if you like my plugs or not, if you have a false opinion about me. I REALLY DON'T CARE. I just care about objective comments.
TO iaoranaemaeva about synthedit:
Yes I love impossible challenge!
This app is very annoying and limited...I'm totally agree.
So, if I have another point it is that the effort that goes into these sounds could probably be better spent.
]]>What I am wondering about this morning is why I would WANT the mechanical noises added back into a synthetic piano - when it has been a goal of builders (of physical pianos) to eliminate or reduce them as much as possible.
These are the limitations of wood, felt, etc and I don't see a need to simulate those shortcomings. They add nothing to the music, although they may add something to a recording in attempts to convince a listener that the instrument used was "physical".
The player isn't fooled, i.e. I do KNOW that the sounds are produced electronically.
OK, I know, I know,they can be switched off, but why even bother to include them now that they can be eliminated, whereas in the past builders could only reduce them in their attempts at eliminating them ?In other words;
Too far, too far already, WAY too far.Heck, if I want a recording to sound "REAL" I can add background noises of muffled coughs and sneezes from the audience.
What audience ?, you may ask.
The virtual audience of course (-:
I completely agree - this has been discussed with the developers in past threads, and if I recall correctly, both Phillipe and I said that if piano builders could have eliminated these non-musical noises, they would have.
What's so musical about the thunk of a pedal or a key hitting the key bed? Do the rubbing noises of a piano action really give anyone pleasure?
Glenn
]]>Heck, if I want a recording to sound "REAL" I can add background noises of muffled coughs and sneezes from the audience.
What audience ?, you may ask.
The virtual audience of course (-:
I actually did this in a piece that I did with Garritan Personal Orchestra some time to make for a more realistic concert hall and it really DID improve the suggestion of listening to a 'live' recording
Hans
]]>What I am wondering about this morning is why I would WANT the mechanical noises added back into a synthetic piano - when it has been a goal of builders (of physical pianos) to eliminate or reduce them as much as possible.
These are the limitations of wood, felt, etc and I don't see a need to simulate those shortcomings. They add nothing to the music, although they may add something to a recording in attempts to convince a listener that the instrument used was "physical".
The player isn't fooled, i.e. I do KNOW that the sounds are produced electronically.
OK, I know, I know, they can be switched off, but why even bother to include them now that they can be eliminated, whereas in the past builders could only reduce them in their attempts at eliminating them ?
In other words;
Too far, too far already, WAY too far.
Heck, if I want a recording to sound "REAL" I can add background noises of muffled coughs and sneezes from the audience.
What audience ?, you may ask.
The virtual audience of course (-: