This is getting tiresome.

Yep.

What a strange comment. This is the whole point of physical modelling - to model the physical characteristics of the instrument, as it relates to musical sound.

Well, exactly!

There IS wood and strings in the process - the physical characteristics of the instrument are captured mathematically, to the extent required to make music. I know Pianoteq doesn't currently model the sound that would be produced if an elephant sat on the piano - we only have limited computing resources, so the model only models the minimum amount of behaviour required for our purposes.

The "so what" is that that it is advantageous if the model can factor those characteristics into the resulting sound output, isn't it?

I've read the Pianoteq patent, and yes, it appears that it does in fact use some form of additive synthesis as you describe. However, the coefficients that produce the harmonics are derived from a physical model  - it's not produced by a simple spectrum analysis. (if it were, that would NOT be physical modelling - that would be much closer to sampling). I guess you are saying that in order to bring a given existing piano model closer to one that is not currently modelled, we could modify the spectrum. I'm sure this would produce some kind of a result - yes. It won't be as good as just doing it properly though.

The physical object IS modelled, but only to a degree that is relevant and useful for our purposes, given finite compute resources.

All IMHO of course - I definitely do not have a thorough understanding of Pianoteq.

Greg.

Input > process > output
There is no wood or strings in "process", it merely represents the sounds that those components as a WHOLE produce in the physical machine.

Sure, mahogany sounds different to beech, floating soundboards are freer than captured boards, etc so what ? 
What is needed is little more than the envelope of each frequency that is associated with each note.

The elasticity of the glue used to stick the plies together probably doesn't matter, the physical object itself isn't modeled

aandrmusic: Of course it is modelling the behaviour. It is modelling the physical behaviour, as it relates to sound production.  Again - Pianoteq does not currently model the case at all, if the product literature is to be taken...literally. ;^) It models the strings, soundboard, and hammers. There is no mention of the case.  If it is true that it doesn't model the case (and I don't know for sure whether it does or does not), then the reason for that may be that for most pianos, the case just isn't important.  From what Joe said, it appears that the case IS important for the Bosendorfer, and for that reason, Pianoteq may need to be augmented to incorporate the case into the model. 

Even if it does model the case, it may still require internal changes to the model, for the specific characteristics of the Bosey in order to produce a really convincing result. (just surmising)

Greg.

Hello Greg,

Thank you for recognizing one of the main differences between a Bösendorfer and a Steinway lies in the function of the case.  The Bösendorfer's piano case is designed to project some of the sound; in contrast, the Steinway's piano case is constructed with the inner rim and the case being glued together and formed together as a single unit -- in order to make the case comparatively "inert" acoustically, and to make the soundboard the chief transmitter of soundwaves in the air.  Personally, from first hand experience in playing both brands of concert models, I can confirm that the American Steinway D (as I haven't played a German Model D) plays physically louder than an Imperial Concert Grand.  EDIT:  (I have played both brands at NAMM shows in Annaheim California USA, and have played Steinway Ds in various concert venues including Symphony Center in Chicago, and have played the Bösendorfer Imperial Concert Grand (conductor/pianist Maestro James Levine's piano) in Highland Park Illinois USA at the Ravinia Festival.)

Cheers,

Joe

Even if it does model the case, it may still require internal changes to the model, for the specific characteristics of the Bosey in order to produce a really convincing result. (just surmising)

Greg.

BTW;  YES, I think it was racist.
M&H use "immigrant labor" for loading the plies into their plywood making molds - I can tell because they "look different" to the management WASPS, but they're not all "black".   

Anyway, back to the original topic.
A model is a model is a model - it is a representation of something  and can be implemented in different ways and different materials from that which it is a model OF.

An electronic "model" of a piano, whether analogue or digital, "models"(verb) the BEHAVIOR of a wooden piano - it does NOT model(verb) the implementation of a wooden piano.

Hence the "can't get from a (model of a) plywood case to a (model of a) kerfed case" statement is untrue, since the physical structure of the case is irrelevant.
They may BEHAVE differently, but that can be taken care of with a few coefficients in some equations somewhere - I don't know which ones

That was far and away from a racial slur. People getting way oversensitive these days...

Thank you, Mr. Dragon, for your refreshing commentary.

Perhaps, instead of "burly black guys", I should have stated "skilled Steinway artisans" wrestle the inner and outer rims of maple plies into shape around a mandrel system that was built in the 1880's.

Cheers,

Joe

Meanwhile, if someone has access to the actual instrument, I'm sure with the parameters already on offer, regardless of the specifics of how to get there, the piano in question can be modeled closely enough to be satisfying.

honjr wrote:

EvilDragon wrote:

That was far and away from a racial slur. People getting way oversensitive these days...

It is in America - where I live.

Well yes. If you want to be pc, however, please also take into account:
- this is not a u.s. forum (international, or french, but not u.s.),
- the u.s. is not america; america is the name of two continents,
- using phrases like 'people of color' as synonymous with us blacks does not make any sense here,
- we all already know about the greatness of us culture, we have been informed of this on numerous occasions.

For the rest I agree with the idea that we should leave race and skin color out of conversations where they do not belong. We have now been more or less proven to be all african-europeans, african-asians, etc.

Yes, thank you for your clarifications. I understand this is international, which is why I qualified my remarks as being from the perspective of the US (or America - a term commonly used in the US to refer to the US, as shown for example in dictionary.com and in numerous popular songs, for example). But saying certain "blacks" (a term not everyone would agree with in the US in 2016) have the right "mentality" to engage in heavy manual labor is not what we want to hear in this forum. Period. I am very happy to be able to voice my deep admiration for any cultural accomplishments, whether made by Germans, Austrians, etc. - and I will continue to do so!

EvilDragon wrote:

That was far and away from a racial slur. People getting way oversensitive these days...

It is in America - where I live.

Well yes. If you want to be pc, however, please also take into account:
- this is not a u.s. forum (international, or french, but not u.s.),
- the u.s. is not america; america is the name of two continents,
- using phrases like 'people of color' as synonymous with us blacks does not make any sense here,
- we all already know about the greatness of us culture, we have been informed of this on numerous occasions.

For the rest I agree with the idea that we should leave race and skin color out of conversations where they do not belong. We have now been more or less proven to be all african-europeans, african-asians, etc.

That was far and away from a racial slur. People getting way oversensitive these days...

It is in America - where I live.

Hello Benjamin,

Of course, you may "try" to recreate a Bösendorfer 290 from a Pianoteq D4, but I am going to offer you factual information as to why that feat is essentially impossible to do.   True, Pianoteq's D4 and the B290 have extended keyboards, but that's where the similarity ends.

As a person who has performed on an authentic Bösendorfer 290, and who has witnessed how the B290's piano case is constructed, it is the difference in construction that prohibits making a D4 .fxp sound indistinguishable from a B290.  If one were to rap your knuckles on a Steinway Model D's piano case, you would almost break your hand because the Steinway's construction is so robust.  This is by design. In fact, a Steinway's piano case is constructed by gluing together several long plies of wood (I believe over 26' in length) and having numerous burly black guys "muscle" the plies into place around a piano-case-shaped "mandrel", using muscle and aided by hydraulic jacks.  (Sorry for the "black" reference, but NY Steinways are made in Queens NY exactly that way ... by laborers who have the "mentality" for manhandling wood -- at least for the piano's case.  No complaint is made about the other artisans who work for Steinway in Queens NY or Hamburg Germany.)

Now, contrast a Steinway's construction with a Bösendorfer 290's construction:  Instead of manhandling several parallel glue-covered plies of wood around a mandrel, a Bösendorfer 290's  case consists of a SINGLE thick piece of wood, into which a great number of sawblade cuts (called "kerfs") have been introduced into what becomes the inside of the piano's case.  By introducing these almost-all-the-way-through kerfs, the single piece of wood is flexible enough to be bent into shape without hydraulics and burly manpower!  Once into shape, a team of artisans proceeds to glue "wedges" of wood into the bent openings left by the bending process.  This results in a wooden construction that is much less "stressed" as the Steinway product.

The end result is this:  When one raps his knuckles against a Bösendorfer 290's case, it will sound akin to rapping the body of a 'cello or contrabass -- instead of a knuckle-breaking thud when doing the same thing to a Steinway Model D's piano case.  This difference is made with the specific intention of the Bösendorfer's piano case to act as a resonator!!  Thus, a Bösendorfer's sound is more "singing" than a Steinway's sound, but it does not have the sheer raw power that a German- or New York Steinway D has.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,

Joe

First, I'm certain no one in this forum appreciates the racist slurs. People of color created much of the greatest of all American art forms - gospel, blues, jazz, rock and roll, and popular song -  and have contributed mightily to the success of America in myriad other ways. I'm sure you are a good guy, but this kind of talk is not in the spirit of American ideals. Secondly, of course it is possible to model a Bösendorfer - although the current Pro 5 model might have to be extended through the introduction of new variables and correlations between new and existing variables.

Not the vocal cords themselves.
The BEHAVIOR of the whole vocal system, including the vocal cords ? - YES.

It depends on how the PHYSICAL model is implemented. The vocal cords are part of the vocal system.

IF the model is implemented with filters (and that's a big IF), the parameters of the filters, if it's proper physical modelling, may well be derived from the PHYSICAL properties of the vocal cords, and other parts of the vocal tract.

Greg.

Trying to do it from recordings or samples is a futile attempt.

But if you were asked to model a person with a different timbre (due to age, sex etc), you most certainly would consider the vocal cords.

Your analogy is not very good, IMHO.

Pianoteq is *physically* modelled!

Greg.

Not the vocal cords themselves.
The BEHAVIOR of the whole vocal system, including the vocal cords ? - YES.

Somewhere in the mathematical model I would have to find whatever equations represent the filters that characterize age, gender, etc.
It would probably be there that I would have to change various coefficients.