Here is something you might find interesting:

http://www.audiocheck.net/testtones_sub...ortion.php

(I use Audition and Echo Mia Midi PCIe Sound card and apart from my two sound systems I use BeyerDynamic DT 770 phones )

Ian

I did once try copying on CD one of Joe Felice's perfomance where he used the extended low range of the D4 in order to hear it on my main system. Almost no low frequency from the sub! So this is normal for piano, the fundamental is there but not overwhelmingly so.

For the high-frequency threshold: hearing almost 14kHz at 67 is actually quite remarkable, good job. However, a YouTube video is not a good test, since those are highly compressed and most lossy audio compression employs low-pass filters. So you might just hear the low-pass of the compression. I would suggest using e.g. Audacity and generate a tone. Also, if at all possible, use a high-quality sound device (not built-in sound or cheap USB thingies like SoundBlaster devices), and listen to it directly. E.g., I use a Focusrite Scarlett, which does not suffer from artifacts; but when I listen to it through the R24, I get rather strong aliasing artifacts. This seems to be due to an incorrect downsampling in the device when used in standalone mode, as this is no problem in USB mode at 96kHz. Annoying nonetheless. (Edit: after some investigation, it is more probably due to harmonic distortion in the Zoom's pre-amps. But let's be real: high frequencies with 12+ kHz at -3dB are not a likely real-life scenario.)

For comparison, my upper hearing threshold is also about 14-15kHz, and I am 30 years younger than you. I guess living in a big city with constant noise takes its toll (and also there might have been a few club visits too many in my youth). It's still not too bad considering even youngsters at 10-15 rarely have a threshold higher than 20-21kHz, and loss of high frequencies is a normal ageing symptom.

I have been thinking about your comment about us only hearing the harmonics (not including the 1st which I understand the Fundamental is called in the USA), from 2nd upward of 27.5Hz.

Thanks for mentioning this.  I decided to check my own hearing using: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8gjsefNYpE

For me at least you are correct.  I cannot hear 27.5Hz at all.   I just "feel" vibration so my hearing A0 note is my hearing the summation of its harmonics.  I can hear the test Sinewave at 32Hz and perceive it as a musical note.

I checked with another site and got the same result.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNf9nzvnd1k

Sadly I also checked using this site for my high frequency hearing and my limit is 13,800Hz.  Maybe not too bad for my 67 years?

Ian

Pleased to see that you are using the Zoom R24.  I have a Zoom H4n for portability reason but don't use its usb sound interface capability.

I don't know how technical you are.   I'm an EE so forgive me if the following bores you.  You may have noticed that I have consistently used the term "servo controlled" which is not the same as active speakers.  Here is an article that might (or might not ) interest you:

http://www.danmarx.org/audioinnovation/servosub.html

Ian

I  made a point of active studio monitors because this was what we were talking about in this thread. Your last response again suggests that you think of speakers in terms of keyboard amplifiers and passive speakers. And because I got this impression, I pointed out that active monitors are very common; in fact they are probably the de-facto norm. For example, I used to have a pair of Behringer 2030A, which are 5" monitors that each bring their own amplifier at about 100W. Active monitors and keyboard amplifiers are different things.

An 8" active monitor (which is what I am using now) usually has a peak power of over 250W per speaker (i.e., about 140-150W RMS seems to be typical). Because of this relatively high output and the fact that active monitors feature their own specifically tuned amplifier, I do recommend them whole-heartedly for piano play. Active monitors have little in common with keyboard amplifiers, however, and this does not invalidate anything you said if the thread starter wants to go the route of a separate amplifier and passive speakers; there are a lot of things to consider.

PS: I don't have a 'beef' with you, on the contrary. I actually do think our opinions are not that far apart, after all.

If you read my reply again you will see that I never said "active" speakers were not used in full blown recording studios.   My point is that small non-active monitors are not best suitable for full satisfaction of listening to a digital (88 key) piano.

I agree that flat frequency response is suitable for listening to classical music and the monitors have to listen to the whole range of instruments.   This also applies to piano but a flat frequency response is not much use for piano music if the amplifier and speaker system has much reduced power output at low frequencies or produces distortion if overdriven.    Again if you read my post you will see that I qualified my statement by mentioning the advantage of active servo controlled speakers.

What's your beef about me mentioning 27Hz!   Bass frequencies need lots of air movement and without servo controlled speakers this can only be achieved by using either large coned speakers, e.g. 12", electrostatic speakers or sub-woofers.   In addition the amplifier must have adequate overhead of at least 6dB  possibly 10dB to drive the speaker at these low frequencies.   You will of course be aware that amplifier frequency range of say 20Hz to 20KHz the harmonic distortion is measured at 1kHz.   The total (harmonic and intermodulation) amplifier distortion at low frequencies can exceed 10% which is audible more so when smaller systems are overdriven.  In addition small (non-active) speaker cones produce distortion when, to produce adequate low frequency level, are overdriven.

It is IMO irrelevant whether we hear the fundamental low frequencies or not.  (I do tune my own acoustic piano)  The original poster might not have any reason to achieve the audio performance I have been describing but others might,  who listen to e.g. pipe organ music (16Hz) or a 97 key Bösendorfer Imperial Grand (come on Modart) playing Busini's Bach.

As an aside I also have a different keyboard set up with two JBL Control 5 (6.5" woofer) and a JBL SB-5 (opposing speaker) sub-woofer.

I have nothing against active systems but as far I know none of the keyboard amplifier manufacturers,  e.g. Peavey, Roland, Behringer , Yorkville,  use active (servo controlled) speaker systems.

If the OP is still reading then I recommend him considering these keyboard amplifiers:

http://www.roland.co.uk/products/subcat....aspx?c=33

Ian

880 are a bit more linear than 990 though, 990 has a 9 dB bump around 100 Hz region

The DT-880 are semi-closed, though, which is why I went with the 990. But I'd say the whole series is pretty good.

I disagree on that one. Active(!) studio monitors are very common and they are designed as tools to assess a mix. For that purpose a premature decision what the listener might or might not hear is counterproductive, which is why studio monitors as a class feature a much 'flatter' frequency response than normal speakers. Also there is such a thing as classical recordings, and people listening to those are much more demanding when it comes to the quality of the recording and mix. The point being: you'll always want monitors that tell you the "truth" about what is in the recording, adding nothing and leaving nothing out. A studio monitor that cannot do this is not a studio monitor at all.

And because of this, active monitors actually are a tool you will find in real-life studios. Of course frequency responce in the lowest range is a problem for every speaker system. Active monitors do have an advantage here, since they feature their very own amplifier that can be tuned specifically to them. If one really wants to boost the lowest frequencies (I find that with 8" speakers and larger there is really not much need, though), many monitors can be complemented with a subwoofer.

This is a statement I don't really get at all. What's your point, exactly? The lowest note on most grands is indeed the sub-contra A at 27.5 Hertz. However, this is in a frequency range where most humans have difficulty hearing notes as notes, since we are very close to the infrasonic range. What most humans actually hear in this range is a low-frequency rumble plus harmonics. Chords don't really sound like chords either.

So I daresay a speaker system which has a decent frequency response down to 40-50 Hertz is good enough, since of course there will not be a hard cut-off below. And the 4kHz for the c''''' are not the full picture either. Again there's a lot of harmonics to be considered; in fact I'd say a piano like many acoustic instruments can even produce ultra-sonics. Which is a very real problem when recording them... but not for playback. For playback, everything that manages decent linearity up to 20kHz is fine, yielding an effective 'interesting' range of 50Hz-20kHz.

There have been many discussions on this board concerning which speakers are best for Pianoteq, and it seems to me these discussions always revolve around studio monitors. Studio monitors seem like a logic choice since what we're after is the recreation of realistic piano sound and studio monitors are designed for accurate audio reproduction.

But is this really the best choice for a piano player who doesn't do any home recording/mixing but wants better playability and a more pleasing, realistic sound from his digital piano? Isn't hifi better suited for filling a room with a nice pleasing piano sound?

I find it striking that most people here are recommending/buying studio monitors even though surely not everyone here is a studio recorder? So why would you choose monitors over hifi?

Jonas,

"Hi-Fi" or High Fidelity before it name shortening is the domain of audiophiles.   These are people who demand the highest level of sound quality from whatever media they are listening to.   Their equipment is called High-End Audio and systems exist that cost £100,000.   "Hi-Fi" however to most non-audiophiles means a home stereo system which in no way is true High Fidelity and is not suitable for Digital Pianos.

The normal frequency range of a piano or digital equivalent is from 27Hz to 4186Hz.  The frequency range of a Hi-Fi speakers is typically 20Hz-20KHz with total distortion less than 0.5%.   However the rated wattage of an amplifier is specified at 1kHz,  not 27Hz the lowest note of a piano.   With the volume control at say middle setting the lower notes will be too quiet.  Turning the volume control up significantly will introduce audible distortion. 

The solution is to use a higher powered amplifier and speaker/s which can produce low frequencies with high efficiency.   Studio monitors (unless full blown recording studios) are designed to reproduce what the average listener will hear listening to a CD,  not to replicate the low notes of a digital piano never mind an acoustic one.

Larger speaker woofer cones are able to move more air than smaller cones.  My Peavey KB300 keyboard amplifier has a 15" woofer and 1" titanium tweeter.  The amplifier is rated at 140W with frequency response 30Hz to 30kHz with less than 0.1% distortion.

So I recommend an amplifier with twice the wattage rating of the speakers you will use and speakers with large cones.   The alternative is to use active (servo controlled) speakers which have built-in amplifiers and relatively small speaker cones.   These amplifiers allow for much greater cone movement (hence greater air movement) as it can control and limit the extent of cone movement.   Without using a servo method this greater cone  movement would result in cone failure.   I suggest you take a CD of a classical piano recording which has great dynamic range to a local keyboard stockist and for a sound test of various speaker systems.

Ian

EvilDragon wrote:

That's why it's always good to have headphones which have as flat frequency response as possible. There aren't a lot of them...

That's why I have my DT-990. I specifically went hunting for affordable monitor phones that were still as linear as possible.

880 are a bit more linear than 990 though, 990 has a 9 dB bump around 100 Hz region One of the most linear headphones are Denon AH-D2000 (sadly discontinued).

Sure, the Neumann KH's are impressive but the price too...
There are many cheaper alternatives that also do a (very) good job: Dynaudio, KRK, Adam, Fostex, Genelec, to name just a few.

Well, you're right. There are cheaper alternatives. But on the other hand speakers are something I buy once and the Neumanns do also a good job in the living room as substitute for HiFi speakers.

At least they are a good (to me they are the best) benchmark for comparing and evaluating.