Modartt user forum » Pianoteq user forum » Ongoing discussion of VPiano and PianoTeq on another forum
There's an ongoing discussion, and sometimes a comparison, of VPiano and Pianoteq over on the PianoWorld forum:
http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthre...ost1212609
(The VPiano has reached GuitarCenters and other US stores, so there's suddenly more talk.)
I read this before and it seems you can't really argue with someone about the sound, because that's what they're hearing. You could only express your preference. But, it shows why people are, or are not purchasing the product.
What I like about Pianoteq, is its ability to address customer concerns. The software is quite organic; easy to update. Most people seem to have notice sound improvements between versions two and three. So if this continue to be the case with further updates, then the future looks promising.
i'm not normally a poster on these sites, but i'd like to convey some of the thoughts i laid out over the holiday weekend (alias "fat and flat"...) on pianoworlds forum. I currently run a lot of sample programs on my pc (GAS, Galaxy, BDMO etc- none of which i am satisfied with) controlled by a P-250 board and i have been playing around with Pianoteq's demo last several weeks but havent purchased it....yet. I also have a smaller Steinway acoustic g - for comparison sake. I got into all the digital stuff because i wanted to make recordings of my "arrangements" for family and friends etc.... anyway, I had the chance to sit down and play the V-Piano 3 times over the last 5 days, both through external speakers and with a high-quality studio headset. i would start by saying, we aren't comparing apples-to-apples here, pianoteq is asking a very reasonable price for their efforts, and as Don mentions below- their responsiveness to their customers is very impressive. Roland's asking almost $5-6K for a brand new integrated "solution" (which, to me, IS the answer)... now thats a lot of pain in the pocketbook. but i would say this- to me it was the ultimate "players experience", at least as far as digital stage pianos go. i guess my wonder is whether it will be also the ultimate "recording experience"....?..... anyway, as i noodled around with the 4 preset pianos- my initial reaction was- "what can i play to fit that sound" vs. "what do i need to change/tweak to make it sound more like what i am after". part of that may have well been my fingers talking- the boards action and touch is playable to an extreme. the contols are very easy to understand and manipulate, and to me- that is important. It takes minimal understanding to adjust ambience, detuning, hammer hardness, resonance, etc. the 24 presets pretty much cover the waterfront, so the tweaks are very much just personal preference kind of stuff- the main decision really rests with how much ambience do you want. the visual interface on a laptop is nice but not necessary, you can do it off the LCD on the board pretty easily. Pianoteqs interface is also very intuitive, i have no trouble with it, although there are some sliders that i don't really understand what their output accomplishes. But for me, i admit that i spend most of my time with pianoteq moving mikes and adjusting parameters because i am just not getting exactly where i want it to be... one of the posters in the discussion with me, who himself was not that impressed with v-piano (from the videos/ audios only, hadn't actually played it and was also a classical player looking for that sound- i am not..) had an interesting observation .. he felt the brightness/ depth/ character of v-piano's sound that i and others who had actually played the board were raving about may have been driven by the amount of dedicated computing power that roland had stuffed into the board, vs what he saw as a too-lean demand on CPU from Pianoteq (perhaps to accomodate older computers) producing a darker, less complete sound (he didn't care for pianoteq either). maybe that is the advantage of the integration of both hardware and software. the end user has no input into the decision, the developer has total control... i don't know, as George Duke says on his video, i am just a piano player. So I would encourage the folks at Pianoteq to perhaps bifurcate the market into a "pro" market and a "lite" market. I am willing to take a high-end PC and have it run nothing other than pianoteq if that is what it takes to get the most intense sound experience out of the software. after all, the math completely works in pianoteq's favor- they are shooting against a $5K ceiling. a serious person should be willing to make an investment into this stuff- paying a couple grand to get it the hardware/ software combination right is not unreasonable. so for me- now i am in DP Twilight Zone. i don't want to mess with the samples anymore, they just don't get it done in the end. I also don't want to pay an early adopter price of $5000 + for a piece of electronics that may fall apart in a couple years, but has now become the "standard" for the sound i am searching for (i think...). so i look at Pianoteq as the solution, if it could just produce the same output....sigh..
just a postscript to my too-wordy comment above. i would hope that no one- pianoteq users and the developers (who seem to watch this site like hawks!) would see my comments as anti- Pianoteq. they are not at all, and they are written in the spirit of sharing an experience to those who love music and the piano instrument. Roland is obviously pursuing a different path- they are first and foremost hardware people.
I read the discussion on the other forum and found interesting points in it.
So I decided to give my contribute trying to play something soft, romantic and famous with PTQ helping for the lack of this kind of demos as exposed there.
I think the 1st movement of 'Moonlight Sonata' should be a good example even if played by me
It's in the files section
The low register of the V-Piano sounds like it's doubled with Moog's Taurus Bass Pedals. Way too much bass and synthetic sounding. Maybe it's the presets.
To the poster boehnbr: Personally, I love the Vienna Piano (Bosendorfer) of Galaxy Pianos II, but it's important to set your keyboard not too soft or too sensitive, otherwise you only hear the bright notes. You also have to tweak the 'dynamics', you need to set it less sensitive.
etto and alex- i am glad you both posted. i felt lonely- like i did something bad and was being shunned. upon further due diligence it sounds like pianoteq will be releasing a "pro" version- i look forward to its release and hearing demos utilizing it. i really do think modelling is the logical outcome of all this......alex- i am interested in your bos setting on galaxy- of all my samples it seems to be the most useable- can you quickly list the settings you change and to what levels? it would be greatly appreciated. you are right about keyboard velocity settings- getting those right between the keyboard and the program is enough to make you play the guitar instead. i also like the bluthner baby g but there are a lot strange background sounds and it is just too hard to regulate. i think their steinway sample is useless. Etto, i enjoyed your file, you created a very nice preset and your playing is excellent!
PS: if its not cool to post other product settings on this site then don't do it. i certainly understand that.
i would start by saying, we aren't comparing apples-to-apples here, ...
I think this is correct. Pianoteq has approached a market that consists of people who have already invested in hardware: a Keyboard, a computer, a set speakers/Monitors, sound modules, maybe already using another software package etc. .. V-Piano is a complete restart. They would only be in competition, if Roland was to produce the V-Piano as software that could run as a programme on a computers operating system, or if Pianoteq was to merge with the one of the keyboard manufacturers and run on it in the same way that V-Pianos runs its software.
Would those who are currently using their existing set-up be prepared to get rid of it and start again?
Which option would you go for if you were starting from scratch?
Would those who are currently using their existing set-up be prepared to get rid of it and start again?
Which option would you go for if you were starting from scratch?
Answer to first question: No
Answer to second question: A much cheaper keyboard than I now have (a Roland KR7), and Pianoteq.
No matter how good the V-Piano may be, it will be improved - this is inevitable. Will it be completely upgradeable for an indefinite period of time? Keep in mind that the V-Piano is a huge outlay of our dwindling personal resources.
If as someone has suggested, the hammer noise seems to be sampled and not modeled, how will it be fixed in an upgrade? Can anyone here tell me how they upgrade their samples? I suspect that they buy newer samples (sarcasm).
There are still many questions to be answered about it. It certainly seems to be a huge step beyond current DPs, but is the investment worth it? To me, it isn't even close.
Based on my limited experience with Pianoteq and its upgrades rate (I bought 2.0 last October), within a reasonable time period it will outstrip all the rest, and I would predict that this probably includes the new Roland. Big companies don't have the flexibility to respond to the market or our needs/wishes.
As an example let me cite this: I e-mailed Roland for a list of the patch numbers for my Roland KR7 (believe it or not it's not included in the manual). After several attempts I received an e-mail from Japan in broken English stating that it wasn't available for my piano. The only solution was to record little bits of the instruments I used frequently, load them into my sequencer program, read them there and write out a list.
I hope no one is putting too much faith in the V-Piano just yet.
Glenn
The V-Piano's physical keyboard is going to be a classic however!
I tried the RD700GX just now and I thought even it's action was superb (a little step up from my Kawai MP9000 IMHO) - so I can't wait to try the V-Piano's action!
Greg.
The V-Piano's physical keyboard is going to be a classic however!
Yes, I agree.
I just came from our local Long and McQuade, and briefly (stress briefly) examined the V-Piano. The keys are beautiful - the best I've seen in a long time if not ever.
However, after plinking a few notes in the bass, I thought it sounded remarkably similar to my four year old Roland KR7 (rompler sounds).
The wheel was set at Concert 1, and if that's the best it gets, then Roland's physical modeling needs a new model!! That bass sound is why I gave up on my onboard sound and use Pianoteq.
My personal impression is that Shakespeare's famous line ["much ado about nothing"] seems to apply.
I just had a chance to play on the Roland V-Piano.
Basically I agree with much of the comments I have seen in this thread: The keyboard is excellent. I like that ivory-feel and the action is very good.
The pianosounds are very expressive and playable - just like Pianoteq. I think that is the biggest step forward from sampling to fysical modelling. Pianoteq and V-piano have this quality in common. The dynamics are so much more musically expressive than with sampled piano's.
But I was disappointed with the realism of the sounds. They still have something of that typical synthetic, plastic, sound that I never liked in Roland digital piano's since the release of the RD-1000 many years ago.
(Much has improved since then of course, the V-Piano isn't as bad as you might think after reading this.)
Just comparing the sound of the V-piano and Pianoteq, for me Pianoteq is the winner. Even if I wouldn't know the huge difference in price ...
If the critics to V-Piano also refer about the two Steinway models, american and european, I can conclude I found one more reason why Modartt refuse to create a Steinway add-on.
Had anyone ever heard about someone play a real Steinway Grand piano and said it was plastic or with any artificial sound?????
I don't think so...
If a Steinway moddeled get any artificial sound, n any note, any plastic feeling, it will be target of complains. It will not be faced as a precise Steinway recreation, and will be not a Steinway anymore.
But I was disappointed with the realism of the sounds. They still have something of that typical synthetic, plastic, sound that I never liked in Roland digital piano's since the release of the RD-1000 many years ago.
(Much has improved since then of course, the V-Piano isn't as bad as you might think after reading this.)
I was thinking the same thing. Maybe they have a piano at their research center. Perhaps all their digital pianos are based on that one and the same piano. [wink]
Well, Roland once said that their pianos are not based in any brand of Grand pianos, but a own Roland's piano.
V-Piano try to emulate a Steinway Grand, so can't still be the Roland piano used to create early digital models.
m.tarenskeen wrote:But I was disappointed with the realism of the sounds. They still have something of that typical synthetic, plastic, sound that I never liked in Roland digital piano's since the release of the RD-1000 many years ago.
(Much has improved since then of course, the V-Piano isn't as bad as you might think after reading this.)I was thinking the same thing. Maybe they have a piano at their research center. Perhaps all their digital pianos are based on that one and the same piano. [wink]
Ahem, if I may...
V-Piano is a steaming pile of elephant dung. A digital piano that costs $6000 and screws up basic string and pedal mechanics!?!?!?!? No thank you.
What I mean by "screws up basic string mechanics" is that the melody notes in the middle section of Rach's Prelude in B minor get cut off prematurely. This means that the polyphony is not implemented properly and/or they improperly executed the effect of repeating notes softly after playing them loudly, by having the soft strikes merely replace the loud ones.
What I mean by "screws up basic pedal mechanics" is that it does not pass my "test": http://www.pianoworld.com/forum/ubbthre...Post702976 (hehe, my virgin post on pianoworld!)
I'm no Pianoteq fanboy--I believe Pianoteq has a long way to go before truly eclipsing the so-called "3rd generation" digital pianos. But at least Pianoteq got the basics right. Now to be fair, Pianoteq does not merely cost $250. You need a good 88-key midi controller, a fast computer, and a descent interface. So a complete setup probably costs at the very least $2000. But considering you'd need a computer and an interface to record the V-Piano, THAT hunk of junk really costs upwards of $7000.
Hey, let's try to adjust the YC5 add-on to classic music, and try to compare with V-piano. What about that?
I bet Moddart could create a modelled Steinway even bether the V-piano steinway. But ok, let's not push, since it will take a long before they try replicate a Steinway.
By the time what about a Baldiw piano for the next add-on ?
"Steaming pile of elephant dung" indeed. I can smell it already. ;^)
(Not to mix metaphors, but it's the white elephant in the room.)
I'm not even interested in _trying_ this V-Piano for one reason: short of winning the lottery or signing a major recording contract (hahahahaHAHA!!!), I would simply never have the money to waste on the dang thing!
(And I'd rather "waste" that money on an Octo Mac Pro so I can run oodles of instances of Pianoteq and B4 II through all of my new amp sims, EQs, and Numerology -- enough pianos [and more] to make your head explode!!!)
And the V-Piano weighs 84 lbs. -- I already have a couple of keyboards that weigh that much (or a little more), and while I like their "real" action, I simply can't bear the thought of having another behemoth; in fact, I want to dump the others. (And that "real" action still doesn't compare to a Steinway, Bechstein, or Bösendorfer -- even my Kawai upright feel 10 times better! Of course, being able to actually _feel_ the vibrations through the keys _is_ the ultimate reality. 8^)
Additionally, I've never like Roland's attempts at a piano. I'm not even interested in trying another one to see if they finally got it right. (Sounds like that's highly debatable...) Pianoteq may not be perfect, but it's perfect for me, and the gentlemen behind it are constantly working to genuinely improve and expand the program. (With such a small staff, they've already worked wonders, you have to admit!!!) Investing in their development of the program just makes good sense to me.
Oh, yeah, here's another deal-breaker for me, especially as I'm a "torrents of notes" kind of guy:
Maximum Polyphony: 128 voices
I'm going to pay $$$$ for a simulated piano and you're going to give me _that_ CRAP?!?!
I... don't think so.
What I mean by "screws up basic pedal mechanics" is that it does not pass my "test":
In some situation this could be important: eg I use a lot this technique when I need to turn a page while keeping notes down with sustain pedal
this is good stuff- keep trashing the VP. i'm printing this blog off and sending it to roland and telling them no way they will ever sell this DOA, already-hated POS and they might as well give up, disembowel the developers, and liquidate the remaining stock through ebay. anyway, since i got this post going, i guess i will go buy an earwax removal kit to get out whatever it is that is blocking me from truly experiencing the cacophonous din that more educated ears are hearing from this board.... i agree $6K is an assault on the senses for a first generation keyboard that will probably require lots of updates. i don't believe the pricing will hold up for long. if online retailers have any credibility at all, zzounds has been advertising they got only 1 board left for the last week at prices so low they can't print it ($5495- $500 discount), and its still for sale as of a minute ago... So lets keep thumping it so i can buy it for a controller for pianoteq! under $2K and its a done deal!!!
...they might as well give up, disembowel the developers, and liquidate the remaining stock through ebay...
Actually, since Roland's originally a Japanese company, I believe they would ask (er, compel) the developers to disembowel themselves. %^)
Sorry, but I couldn't resist!
Seriously, if I paid that much for a fake piano, then I deserve to have _them_ gut _me_.
For the ones who got the chance to play the V-Piano:
Is the ivory feeling simulation really like ivory keys, or a intermediation from plastic keys and ivory keys feeling?
A teacher once told me that Ivory keys was not good for playing, due be to rough.
For other side plastic is too sensible if you got some sweat on hands. If was possible to get a key surface that do not implicate so much with sweat, and that was not rough for fast playing sliding.
what is Yamaha trying to accomplish with the Avant Grand? is the ticket on the N3 actually $20K buckaroos? i mean if we are cringing at $6000 for the V-piano, how is this strategy going to work for Yamaha? yeah, i know its real wood and its got good internal speakers and the keys vibrate, but it is still a digital, sampled piano, right? how is it a hybrid- did they model resonance etc? what do you think would be the maximum lifespan of any digital? surely $20K is getting at a price point where an acoustic would have some investment value, or at least longevity. like a car, i expect this thing would depreciate pretty quickly... but I COULD BE WRONG!!!! as i have been thinking this through, i am liking the idea more and more of keeping the brains of the digital piano outside the keyboard. easier to manage upgrades...
About the only electronic components that don't have a steep depreciation curve are speakers - everything else drops like a stone in a vacuum.
Good acoustic grands don't depreciate nearly as fast.
It's my opinion that $20,000 in an acoustic will keep its value much better than $20,000 into any digital, no matter how the sound is produced.
Glenn
About the only electronic components that don't have a steep depreciation curve are speakers - everything else drops like a stone in a vacuum.
Good acoustic grands don't depreciate nearly as fast.
It's my opinion that $20,000 in an acoustic will keep its value much better than $20,000 into any digital, no matter how the sound is produced.
Glenn
i guess my comment about a $20K acoustic having "investment" value is probably not valid. it would be on a much shallower depreciation curve, and with proper care would always have some residual value, but would likely never be worth more than its purchase price. but i would imagine you could keep it playable for.... 30 years? 50 years? with good care. i guess you could keep a digital working properly for 10-15 years, but who would want to? on another blog people are raving about avant garde sounding and playing like a $100k+ instrument, but i gotta believe that is purely the psychology of a new toy. the more i've played the demo Vpiano at GC, the more flaws i've "noticed". its amazing how subjective all this stuff is in one's mind....
but i would imagine you could keep it playable for.... 30 years? 50 years? with good care. i guess you could keep a digital working properly for 10-15 years, but who would want to? on another blog people are raving about avant garde sounding and playing like a $100k+ instrument,
but i gotta believe that is purely the psychology of a new toy. the more i've played the demo Vpiano at GC, the more flaws i've "noticed". its amazing how subjective all this stuff is in one's mind....
1. The friend I refer to often on this forum has rebuilt and sold one 1987 and two 1896 Bechstein grands, and they were still really nice instruments to play (which I have done). Considering that hammers, etc are still available, and that other parts can be made for an acoustic piano, these pianos will likely be around for another 100 years. Where would one get electronic parts in even say 25 years from now?
This is what happens to electronics in the long run, but in the short term, the rapid change in technology dates electronics even faster. Look how much Pianoteq has advanced in a few months and how little it has cost.
2. I agree with the psychology component in the assessment of new pianos. I must go back with my headphones and the V again, but the first few minutes of "plinking" didn't make me excited and want to go back.
Glenn
I was in a music shop in Eastbourne today and I had a go on their Roland V-Piano for about 10 minutes until a sales assistant came and pointedly asked me "can I help you?" lol
Basically:
I thought the *sound* was "good" (although I didn't like it quite as much as the best I've gotten out of Pianoteq),
however best thing about it by *far*, in my opinion, was the "PHA-III ivory feel keyboard with escapement".
I wish my own MIDI controller keyboard for Pianoteq was that nice!
The favourite sound I got out of the Roland in 10 minutes was a soft, mellow detuned, worn out piano sound (very 'feminine') which I haven't quite heard Pianoteq make easily.... mind you, I was playing the keyboard a bit gently so as not to scare the sales guys, and was listening on a small pair of near-field monitors they'd set up, so probably that gave a softer sound that I tend to make banging away on Pianoteq in my basement
Anyways - it would be a pleasure to use a PHA-III keyboard to play Pianoteq! I have no hope in hell of being able to afford the £4500 price tag though! So it's a non-starter...
however best thing about it by *far*, in my opinion, was the "PHA-III ivory feel keyboard with escapement".
I didn't notice a significant improvement over the keys on my 700-GX which has PHA-II. It felt the same to me... maybe the escapement was a little more pronounced but I actually found that to be a little distracting.
Curt
Apparently the V-Piano's action has a faster repetition than the 700GX.
Greg.
Ahh, that's something I didn't try!
More competition?
Waldorf Zarenbourg electro piano:
http://www.waldorfmusic.de/en/products/zarenbourg
Videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mbVulW6QeI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wrpo91We...re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBkkjxGD...re=related
That Waldorf sure sounds very nice. Mind you, I think Pianoteq can pretty much do everything in those demos too. I haven't heard any *metallic* Supertramp-esque Wurly sounds from the Waldorf yet - I can get this sound from Pianoteq very easily.
Greg.
the Waldorf looks like a great idea -
I note it's been vapourware now for about 2 years though!
Wonder when it'll make it to market..
Anyone heard anything about the
http://www.infiniteresponse.com/vax77/ yet...?
I have been tracking the VAX77 for a couple of years. I called them a couple of weeks ago and was told that their website will be updated any day and that they will be ready to ship in September. I am still trying to get a sense of their heavier "piano" action keyboard springs. I spoke with Van Chandler a few months back. He said that they have been receiving plenty of pressure to have a keyboard that would appeal to the pianist. - - - am patiently waiting.
Oh well... at the moment, I won't be able to afford one of their keyboards any!
One of the main exciting features is the return of polyphonic aftertouch, which is not relevant to pianos anyways.
V-Piano have no adjust for real key weight
Petrof piano got this new advance in piano actions:
http://home.hetnet.nl/~velo68/MBA_GB.pdf
More competition?
I found the creator of this instrument.
More competition?
I am now on my second Roland VPiano and have some extraordinarily bad news for anyone looking to create decent quality recordings using these. It probably isn't going to happen.
Sorry to be a tease, but will hopefully get time to write a full report soon. Still waiting on Roland's development team to get back to me with their next embarrassing work-around for what is shaping up to be one of the most disappointing design flaws ever.
What is it all about?
I knew it, Roland always screws up some of the most critical things on the board. Meh.
What would you say that they screwed up on the RD-700GX?
I wasn't thinking on digital pianos per se, but on their workstations there's always some fuckup that really tests your intelligence or something. And it's always like that.
Roland needs to re-think their products a bit better.
I tried the VPiano and appluad their " efforts ", but at the end of the day I use these types of Pianos for Live performance in a mix where the quality of either is hard to differentiate. The idea of Hammer sounds is not what I am interested in the least, but rather how real does it sound, can it cut through in a mix, do I have to bathe it in EQ's. These are the important facts for me. I guess eveyone here is a Solo Pianist, or a Virtual Instrument Composer, where these minute details are important. And reverb on a Piano is because the instrument would sound terrible without it.
It's a matter of convenience for me, when I record I could use PTeq 3.1 or a VPiano but that's only if there isn't a Grand Piano in the studio.
And as far as the action on the VPiano...big deal. It's still only capable of triggering 4-5 different layers maximum, but I guess many like to pretend it acts like a real Piano when actually it is far from a real Pianos action. A real Piano can get dozens of different dynamics, and until one of these Keybed makers breaks down and spends the extra money to implement the 0-16000 MIDI 2 spec, it's just more regurgitations of yore, but much more money.
I guess those scientists in white coats in Rolands Video are really high salary Doctorates and the best in their field.................Jeez guys, do really buy into the whole idea of a dozen scientists with notepads wearing white coats as they study a caged performer on a " real " Grand Piano....??? If you believe in this nonsense then you should see someone who actually wears a white coat.
VPiano's sostenuto is not as good as PTeq's either. It seems to add compression even when I use sfz ocataves in the bottom.
I do enjoy seeing the development continue for PTeq, but Roland cannot possibly give you a new keybed and change the MIDI specs, so it's an expensive dead end solution IMHO.
For that kind of money,and if you are a Virtual Composer a fine real Grand Piano can be had, but if you like Reverb and have no more space in your bedroom studio I can see it being something to impress the newbies with.
Maybe if you put a good performer in white coat, you can change their minds.
And don't forget a "serius look" glasses too.
;-)
And as far as the action on the VPiano...big deal. It's still only capable of triggering 4-5 different layers maximum
First of all, I'm pretty sure V-Piano's action--like ALL digital piano actions--sends all MIDI velocities 0-127. The "4-5 different layers maximum" refers to the sound module's interpretation of those MIDI velocities. Due to practical constrains, it's unreasonable--in fact, nearly impossible--to sample more than a fraction of the dynamic range. That's why modeling is the way forward. And I'm sure that V-Piano uses modeling to generate 127 distinct sounds per note.
but I guess many like to pretend it acts like a real Piano when actually it is far from a real Pianos action. A real Piano can get dozens of different dynamics, and until one of these Keybed makers breaks down and spends the extra money to implement the 0-16000 MIDI 2 spec, it's just more regurgitations of yore, but much more money.
That will NOT make digital pianos more organic. You could have a MILLION velocity steps and it wouldn't be any more convincing than most digital pianos' 3-4 layer sampling.
The real reason acoustic pianos are more organic than digital pianos is that you can create different tonal colors, not based solely on velocity, but on where in the key's travel you start and end. Real piano hammers transfer momentum to the strings. Digital piano actions transfer only SPEED. Heh, let's not even call it "velocity" because it's directionless--the sound module sees single digits, not vectors. In order to yield genuine dynamic and tonal ranges, a digital piano must incorporate 2 things:
1) An action that senses and communicates key position.
2) A sound module that interprets this data appropriately.
Step 1 is easy. The keys should control POTENTIOMETERS, not hit MIDI sensors. I suppose optical pots would be ideal so that there's no superfluous friction. MIDI values 0-127 should be more than adequate to cover the mere half-inch of key travel.
Step 2 is the hard part. But I'm sure the "white coats" can figure it out! Basically, the sound module or software must interpret the pot values in terms of position, distance traveled, velocity, and acceleration.
-, I should patent this idea! LOL
Hi Joshua,
1) An action that senses and communicates key position.
I agree - but I'm sure an experienced pianist such as yourself must also appreciate the piano action - e.g. (1) the escapement, (2) the feeling of throwing the hammer, etc... all these add to our sense of better controlling the instrument. It much easier for me to play an acoustic than a "digital" action.
I know that there is work related to mimicking the touch with electromagnets that dynamically cast different forces on each key as the player depresses them. This way you can theoretically copy any keyboard instrument's touch - be it harpsichord, Hammond B3, or a Bosendorfer, at the flip of a button. Think of how cool that would be: to download the "touch" of an instrument from the internet ...!!
Here is one mention of it: http://www.actapress.com/PaperInfo.aspx...reason=500
2) A sound module that interprets this data appropriately.
That is true, and I think it all comes down to calculating the collision velocity of the hammer and string. Still it may be a complicated operation: one might need to model the physics of the piano action, and inject the key's trajectory (over time) into that model, to produce the hammer's trajectory, and final speed ...
-- Eran
The real reason acoustic pianos are more organic than digital pianos is that you can create different tonal colors, not based solely on velocity, but on where in the key's travel you start and end. Real piano hammers transfer momentum to the strings. Digital piano actions transfer only SPEED.
I'm fairly sure that's regarded as a myth. Given that the player has no further control once the keystroke passes the escapement point, it's reasonable to conclude that the only variable (with regard to influencing tone) is velocity. In physics, momentum is simply the product of mass and velocity -- and because each hammer's mass is constant, for the purpose of modeling a piano's action, momentum and velocity are equivalent descriptors. Beyond its role in affecting the hammer's velocity, the only other function of key position that could possibly influence tone would be its role in controlling the damper.
I agree that there's plenty room for improvement the actions commonly seen in digitals. The exception being digital-acoustic hybrids, which have "real" actions, and have two sensors per note: one at the "hammer" to capture the velocity at which the imaginary "strings" are struck, and a key position sensor to control the virtual "damper".
Voltara