Topic: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

Contrary to the other great (under $1000) post, what about money no object -- with the only consideration or restraint being portability?

Here right now, it's the Kawai VPC-1. That said, quality control isn't great and my unit is due to go into service at less than 6 months old. I do love the action and responsiveness though. If I could afford it, I'd probably spring for the upgraded Ravenworks version of the VPC-1 but am curious, are there any obscure high-end controllers out there with even better action (and build quality) than the VPC-1 but offer that same level of easy portability? Don't need or require onboard sounds or speakers, just need as close to a real grand piano feel and playability. Modartt has the sound sorted.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

Have you checked into your Modartt User area lately?  In it under the Promotional offers tab is a link to a FLK High End Keyboards page.

From there you may access various other informative pages, which can directly address issues you got with your present board.

Here's just one example of the sort of information available, maybe a snippet:

Piano action versus keyboard action.
Which one is better?

To answer this question we interviewed Friedrich Lachnit, company boss of FLKeys, who has been working as a piano concert technician for a long time. Later he headed the CEUS project for Bösendorfer.

"After testing acoustic piano action extensively, we ultimately decided that  - for our purposes - the keyboard action was better suited. While making that decision we looked for the amount of maintenance required, sturdiness, sensitivity to malfunctioning, weight and intended use.

The piano action is built to produce sounds in an acoustic resonating box. By striking a key a hammer made of felt is accelerated to a certain speed. Its purpose is to hit the piano strings and cause them to resonate as softly and as loudly as possible. This form of sound generation was first developed about 300 years ago and after gradual improvements, let’s say, perfected by 1900 with the introduction of the modern grand piano action.

Back then piano makers had to use the materials available to them, which were felt, leather, timber, bone glue, cast steel, iron...However, what they were able to create from this rather simple materials is amazing. Today this technique is still widely used for building pianos, not only because of acoustic and tonal properties.

Musicians' hand and finger muscles work best within a certain range, where they are able to control the movements perfectly. Over time the piano action has been improved and adjusted to fit into that range and give musicians the opportunity to use their full potential. There is really not much left to improve on a professional grand piano.

Keyboard action, on the other hand, was initially only used to operate electrical contacts. The only thing the keyboard action had to do in the beginning was to open and close the electrical contacts. There was no need and no means for measuring acceleration and velocity and translating it into dynamics. Only after electric sound generators became more complex, it was possible to play different volumes with one key.  However, it was still difficult to play with expression because the keys were too light and springy. Subsequently, the first weighted keyboards were developed followed by keyboards with small hammers underneath the keys to give musicians more freedom in the control of dynamics. This development towards the optimal "working range" for musicians started in the 1970s using materials available then. Besides metal and felt new materials were used, which had just proven successful in the industry, like different plastics, PVC, rubber, silicone, laser cut drawing sheets etc. because of course acoustic and tonal properties were irrelevant. It just was (and is) all about the right feel and touch for the musician while controlling electronic sound data with his fingers on black and white keys.

Why then use a grand piano action to control an electrical mechanism?

Felt, timber and leather can change when they are exposed to different environmental influences. This means that the many several small parts in the piano action are constantly varying and therefore have to be frequently readjusted or replaced. Moreover, they are more easily worn down and some of them even can get stuck. Without maintenance the response of the action will become unpredictable and ever-changing.

For a piano key action to maintain well adjusted and able to be played perfectly it has to lay on a suitable, specially levelled and extremely stable foundation. For grand pianos this is usually the keybed made from selected spruce or special laminated wood mostly 4 cm thick. The total weight would be about 80-100 kilograms.

Furthermore, the mechanical acoustic sound produced by the force of the hammers (now waste !) has to be eliminated again.

As a piano maker at heart, of course I love a piano action from the mentioned natural materials, but for a electronic keyboard it is not really suitable. Even parts like solid wood keys with balance rail are sensitive to environmental influences. Felt punchings, key garnishments swell up - stuck, wood can bend,split or break and a necessary suitable and stable key frame is too heavy for a keyboard.

This is why a high quality, state of the art keyboard action combined with the expert piano makers knowledge reviewed and refined, is for us currently the best option to deliver musicians who like to play mostly virtual digital piano style music."

Man, check this one out:

How does FLK Light Sensor Technology work?

The dynamic performance of FLK keys has been designed by reference to intricate measurements taken of a Viennese professional concert grand as well as of different other grand pianos.

By pressing a key the FLK action accelerates a touch weight hammer, which is connected to the key only through the force of gravity. It is - in a way - moving freely, just like in an acoustic grand piano. Even a very short tap of the key with sufficient acceleration can produce a sound.

To ascertain the correct hammer velocity, the most significant measured length has to be as close to the striking point, the point where the hammer produces the sound, as possible. On a concert grand the key reaches this point at about two thirds of the key dip. FLKeys ascertains the hammer's velocity and directional data accordingly at two thirds of the key dip, which ensures the authentic timing.

Note Off is reached at the halfway point when releasing the key, identical to the damper touch down of a concert grand.

In Piano Mode Note On is only possible when the key travels at a certain speed. Therefore, very slow key velocities will not produce a sound.

All measured data is acquired with a resolution of approximately 32.000 levels and at a time accuracy of ±2 milliseconds. In collaboration FLK and TVE developed a new data processing technique, which translates direction of the key movement, moment of key touch, the hammer velocity during the key touch and the release and moment the note ends (damper touch down) into corresponding MIDI data.

The exact location of measurement and therefore the “escapement point” are adjusted manually for every single key individually.

Advantages to FLK Light Sensor Technology

  • high resolution

  • reproducibility, the result of every key stroke is reliably invariable. "You can 'trust the keys' "

  • no attrition

  • resistant to dust and dirt

  • durability

Disadvantages

  • Increased costs in consequence of the requirement for more expert manual labour and the production of specially designed electronic boards in smaller amounts (in Austria.)

Last edited by Amen Ptah Ra (17-08-2020 08:39)
Pianoteq 8 Studio Bundle, Pearl malletSTATION EM1, Roland (DRUM SOUND MODULE TD-30, HandSonic 10, AX-1), Akai EWI USB, Yamaha DIGITAL PIANO P-95, M-Audio STUDIOPHILE BX5, Focusrite Saffire PRO 24 DSP.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

Cheers.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

Hi Stastusfoe,

As an owner of a Roland RD2000 I'd like to give it a thumbs up. I appreciate it's got it's issues (particularly the 'marmite' V piano tones which I quite like) but the keyboard is built like a tank, the action is the closest thing I have played to a real piano and the interface makes playing piano VST's and modelled pianos so simple (probably due to the fact that it doubles as a controller keyboard).
The ability to easily combine internal and external voices simply is a joy to work with. I have the dedicated Roland stand and combined with the RD2000 I think it's one of the nicest looking digital stage pianos around.
I fully understand it won't suit a lot of people, but that does not detract from it being a good stage piano that lends itself to controlling external sounds.
The final positive is that the RD2000 can be bought quite cheaply on the secondhand market.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

I really want the Lachnit MK23, but EUR to USD is so high.

I checked out the MP11SE past weekend and the keybed is pretty heavy compared to the real concert grands nowadays.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

The Lachnit FLK is surely a candidate to consider but the use of a modified Fatar keybed (avoided by many real-action lovers) is a minor satback. Despite the optical sensing, the Fatar keybed will never give the true acoustic keybed experience. Another company called Kaduk (situated in The Netherlands) took this concept a step further and are using a real acoustic piano keybed combined with their refined optical sensing method. As a starting company they don't have a prototype yet and their digital MIDI controller is build to order. Just take a look at https://kaduk.nl.

As far as the Kawai VPC1 (which I own) is concerned, there has been no innovation nor any upgrade in the last 7 years, which is somewhat disappointing. I am currently looking into the possibility of performing some Ravenscroft mods on the VPC1 myself, but need serious advice of skilled piano technicians or others if it's worth the time and effort. In some other thread the velocity issues of the VPC1 and how to deal with them have been discussed, so that is a good starting point.

Without wanting to hijack this thread, what is your take on modding the VPC1?

Last edited by Frank (18-08-2020 13:29)

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

Frank wrote:

Another company called Kaduk (situated in The Netherlands) took this concept a step further and are using a real acoustic piano keybed combined with their refined optical sensing method.

This is why I made this post. Knew there would be a company out there I'd never heard of. Their midi controller looks to be a very high-quality VPC-1 type unit with its minimalistic and clean design. At this stage, it's exactly what I've been hoping existed. Cheers for the intel. Time to start saving!

Frank wrote:

I am currently looking into the possibility of performing some Ravenscroft mods on the VPC1 myself, but need serious advice of skilled piano technicians or others if it's worth the time and effort. In some other thread the velocity issues of the VPC1 and how to deal with them have been discussed, so that is a good starting point.

Without wanting to hijack this thread, what is your take on modding the VPC1?

Interestingly, I've just recently emailed Ravenscroft about self-modding/upgrading and have yet to hear back. Am curious if there are things non-skilled tech folks might be able to do in terms of mods which could improve things. Overall, I'm pleased with the playability of the VPC-1 but am having issues with some odd and frustrating key noises at the lower registers. Am trying to resist the urge to open it up and resolve things myself, but as this would void my warranty, am waiting patiently for the opportunity to have it worked on by a qualified and approved tech. The VPC-1 frustrates me with its build quality inconsistencies relative to how much it costs.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

I've also been waiting years for Kawai to come out with an updated/improved VPC2. I don't want all the internal sounds and buttons/knobs of the MP11SE. At this point I'm seriously considering a more extreme solution which would be somewhat less portable... but still portable. In the user section of the Modartt website there is a discount on "PNOscan II recording rail - a MIDI retrofit system from QRS." I don't have personal experience with this, but there are several companies that make optical sensor systems like this. My idea it to build a portable case that would house my Steinway's action (along with one of these optical MIDI systems). It would also need to include a hammer stop system, I'm thinking a simple rail with thick felt that would catch the hammer shanks. That way I could remove my piano's action when I need to give a Pianoteq based performance. Not that that will be happening anytime soon here in the US...

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

NathanShirley wrote:

....
My idea it to build a portable case that would house my Steinway's action (along with one of these optical MIDI systems). It would also need to include a hammer stop system, I'm thinking a simple rail with thick felt that would catch the hammer shanks. That way I could remove my piano's action when I need to give a Pianoteq based performance. Not that that will be happening anytime soon here in the US...

Steinway is using Renner Actions and has bought the company in 2019.
IIRC formite CyberGene on PianoWorld has done a similiar DIY project and posted a description over there.

If the budget is available, you could also try to get hands on an Alpha Piano Studio or Tour, featuring a full grand action.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

@ Statusfoe

If I had the money I would definately go for het Kaduk Respons. They seem to be using a continuous optical sensing method (details are not disclosed) that has velocity speed values of 128 * 128 = 16.384. I will email you some more details not mentioned on their website if an attachement is possible via this forum.
Their product looks promising and as I mentioned before, uses a real piano keybed.

Regarding the VPC1 mods, I understand your hesitation concerning the warranty. I'm in the same boat.
I have written to Kawai UK, Kawai Germany, Kawai Japan and Kawai USA, but none of them could tell if there is a VPC2 planned or any other upgrades to the VPC1.
There have been many complaints about the F-30 pedals, which are Fatar :-(
The MP7SE and MP11SE have optical sensing in for the pedals. Why Kawai does not upgrade the old pedals is a mistery. The VPC Editor is slow and often hangs.
I sold my MP7SE and bought the VPC1 which for me is surely an improvement, but knowing that technology advances the VPC1 may be temporarely.

Keep us posted on any answers you get from Ravenscroft concerning your request.

@NathanShirley

Did you take a look at https://kaduk.nl? You may find just what you are looking for and you can always email them. They're very polite people and answer all questions you may have.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

The Kaduk site is very interesting - thanks for that. Looks like some people really thinking about these issues and trying to take the state of the art forward. Very welcome. I thought Lachnit's views interesting too.

I moved from a VPC1 to an N1X (for use at home only) recently and what I'd say for sure is that they're very different. I'm not sure the N1X is more expressive, as such. I'd got used to the VPC1 and felt I could get pretty much what I wanted. I couldn't really play the N1X to begin with. It took a few weeks. After which I could no longer play the VPC1.

I'm sure this sort of thing - losing the 'touch' for an instrument - isn't necessary. I also use a Yamaha CP4 regularly and seem to be able to manage with that. But, in my case at least, I'd have needed to keep playing the VPC1, along with the N1X. Since I got the N1X to replace the VPC I didn't bother.

During those few weeks of 'acclimatisation' I did have the sense that the nature of the N1X action (which, for those who don't know this instrument, is basically a Yamaha grand piano action) 'fitted' better with the sound of the piano (pianoteq). There was something about the way that the 'hammer' clunked into place that seemed to match the sound - not so surprising I suppose. So I've come to find it more satisfying than the VPC1. Actually, I'd say much more satisfying. For some strange reason too I find the bass much more controllable. Haven't worked out what that's about. But it's definitely changed my playing - and for the better. All of this stuff is so subjective and open to suggestion though - impossible to know what's really going on.

Problem is of course that the N1X is big and heavy, and costly. I thought the VPC1 very good for what it was, and I didn't seem to suffer from any of the quality issues that others have described. I'd certainly be interested to try that Kaduk Respons. But the trouble is that I might need to have it for a couple of weeks before I knew if it worked for me. Better start saving the pennies (again).

I doubt, by the way, that the hi-res velocity sensing (if that is what it is) would make the slightest difference to me. I work in Pianoteq with a restricted velocity range (ie less than 127 steps) because that is what seems to work best with the N1X, in my hands anyway. So I'm maybe working with the range 20 - 100 (can't remember exactly off-hand) and that's still plenty of resolution for me. Maybe I just play like an oaf, but I wouldn't be surprised if 20 velocity steps was enough. I certainly don't think I could reproduce 20 different 'weights' reliably.

Ian.

N1X - PT Pro - Linux

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

Thanks for the tips (Alpha Piano and Kaduk), I'll definitely check them out.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

The following was posted by Thomas Kaduk on the PianoWorld forum...


Dear all,

First of all I want to say that I am amazed by the fact that we appear on such an international big forum so suddenly.
As some did mention the website was just quickly compiled after a spike of attention after a pianist for whom we made the interface was invited at the international epta conference in Vienna in last October. Photos are indeed taken by mobile phone of the stuff that was around at the workplace at that moment. Judging from the reactions some clarification might be welcome. And, Hans, thank you for informing us about the thread.

As for our standard products we basically offer keyboards made in different ways and in any size. If the keyboard is straight, which means the regular size, not much is wrong with wooden keys and felt bushings. You can get our wooden keyboards for it, or many other keyboards on the market. Obviously there still is space for improvement from a wooden keyboard performance wise. But only if the pianist is interested in quicker response and more precise feeling. Not all are, some just prefer a good amount of mass.

Together with pianists and physicians we have been doing research on ergonomics. For me it is an absurd thought that people of different sizes have to play on the same size and shape of keys. It appears that in many circumstances the regular one has enormous drawbacks in terms of musicality and health. For that reason we offer all our products in all layouts and sizes.

When only the size (or shape) of the keyboard changes a lot in a normal piano, the keys are not straight anymore and serious drawbacks are introduced in the performance since the keysystem is not stable anymore since the center of mass shifts outside the base of support in normal set-up. The keys start to swim around in their normally soft bushings and get very irregular -and in some parts of the trajectory- sudden very high friction. Also they get a lot of torsion on the wood which together results in a very indirect and muddy response. In order to solve the problem there are several things that can be done. Stability of the system can only be solved using the vertical axis. The support can be lifted and the center of mass can be lowered. Or the bushings can be made harder and more precise and the keys can be made stiffer but not heavier. As long as there is only wood and felt to rely on there is nothing that can be improved on the stability since you cannot change anything drastically enough to solve that problem. Also nothing on the bushings can be done as long as felt is used since with tighter tolerance the keys would simply get stuck. With wood it could be made somewhat stiffer, in most cases not stiff enough, but in any case way too heavy.

For this we have the 3 Series. Wooden keys, which are by default the cheapest to make, cheap composite reinforcement and way more precise bushings. It solves a reasonable amount of the problems but certainly not all since wood is still the core material. For many people the performance on a let's say 7/8 keyboard made in this way would be good enough though and that makes it what I believe the best wood based keyboard that can be made. The price is, as I may say, very low for a completely custom keyboard that performs really well. Still such a 7/8 would never perform as good as the original straight keyboard. This keyboard we make in two flavors, which is related to the properties of wood. The performance variant uses viber directions that give the best mechanical properties but is very susceptible to humidity changes. The stability variant uses half of the wood of each key to remain in shape while humidity fluctuates and therefore has to be made of stiffer and thus more heavy woods in order to be as stiff as the performance variant that uses all the fibers for stifness.

To solve it all we have the 5 Series. A custom keyboard made of high quality composites, calculated to perform exceptionally well on the instrument of choice. There is no wood anymore and there are only space grade appropriate materials, techniques and tight tolerances used. This keyboard has all the characteristics needed to perform as the best straight wooden keyboards, but will be better in many cases even when applied as a 7/8 keyboard compared to an original one. As a normally sized keyboard it is more direct than any wooden one for sure. Also we put tremendous effort into making this product much better maintainable then any other one to guarantee that in real life it stays better then any traditional one and that if something is needed it is much easier and faster to do.

The 7 Series is for freaks like me. It is simply the best we can do. It is also the keyboard with the smallest financial margin. We are far more happy to sell 3 or 5. And yes, 7 is still extremely expensive (as is literary written on the website).

I hope this gives some understanding about the standard products we offer. Apart from that we work on many different custom requests and above all on research.

Furthermore the action on the photos is a wng. As for all actions they have positive sides and downsides. We believe though that out of all commercially available actions these actions have much more plusses than minuses in most applications, not in all. Therefore we would be happy to use them often. We did create however several very different actions ourselves for experimental purposes. This includes wire driven actions, hydraulic and electronic actions but also regular double repetitions. For our very own instrument that is still in development we are testing on our own magnesium double repetition action. The main reason we won't use wng for that is mainly because we needed very different internal ratios. And on top of that we have been trying to solve some minor issues. Since we ourselves are the only ones that have seen it, there might be little feedback on our action on this forum. Also, our own action is not interesting for existing pianos since they are designed for different parameters.

In general in our approach we try to make the best we can and base it on extensive research and testing. We also do that for the production process so that we develop good mixtures of very high quality and at a price that makes the product interesting to many more people that want and or need it. We do not believe so much in extensive manual labor, marble and gold. We try to achieve better products with the use of the most modern technologies, including production technologies and thorough research, hence products as 5 Series which by now are automatically being designed and calculated on the computer (including finite element analysis for the stiffness, weight and vibrational properties). All we need are measurements of sizes and weights and the computer designs the system for us. The high design and production efficiency makes it possible to deliver a product like this for the price of a wooden one.

I hope this clarifies what we are doing. If there are any questions please contact us via our website. I don't know if I will be able to keep an eye on the forum.

Kind regards,
Thomas Kaduk

Last edited by sigasa (27-08-2020 15:06)

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

Soon you may have no need to hunt down only truly amicable tradesmen makers of the rarer electronic keyboards with life like acoustic keyboard response  —just in quaint European townships. 

Check out the man Robert Estrin of LivingPianos.com.

Along with the question, “Are digital pianos better than acoustic pianos?” he seems to pose, very likely he’s got just something certainly in the making that you really will appreciate and American made now to boot:

He kindly urges you to get in touch with him.

Man, he’s awfully enthusiastic, animated even!

Last edited by Amen Ptah Ra (14-09-2020 13:50)
Pianoteq 8 Studio Bundle, Pearl malletSTATION EM1, Roland (DRUM SOUND MODULE TD-30, HandSonic 10, AX-1), Akai EWI USB, Yamaha DIGITAL PIANO P-95, M-Audio STUDIOPHILE BX5, Focusrite Saffire PRO 24 DSP.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

In my opinion, if the keyboard does not have a real grand piano mechanism, then you will not get enough true feel when playing. The problem is that keyboard "simulators" usually are "sticky" or "heavy" to play. This applies to all and even the best representatives of such keyboards. This heaviness arises from the almost direct relationship between the key and the hammer. You need to "press" the key with sufficient force to the very bottom. And press all the way down. It's just that real keyboards have a lot of inertia, and the pianist usually plays with it when playing. Electronic instrument keyboards have little or no inertia. This is one point. The second point is that after pressing the hammer will be caught and holding the key down requires a very small amount of force. In simulators, holding the key on the bottom requires full force to hold the hammer in place. Therefore, simulators are tiresome for a long game, they are more "dumb" in sensations, they do not allow you to easily perform fast passages on the pianissimo, have ease of performance in quick and easy passages, and practice fast rehearsal repetitions well. A real keyboard can be quite heavy, but not tedious to play, unlike digital instrument keyboards.

Good research:

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01193708

It seems to me that the acceleration graph reflects well the peculiarities of the keyboard and mechanics. It is in the relationship of the applied forces and accelerations that one must stop the gaze when researching and developing keyboards.

The optical sensors under the keys are impressive in their technology, but they cannot fully simulate the movement of the hammer, which has many complex movements due to the peculiarities of the mechanism + vibration mode of the hammer itself.
From this it turns out that the best option is to use optical sensors from the project:

https://github.com/ekumanov/cybrid/

Here you have a real keyboard, getting information from the hammer in the right place and optics that do not introduce any distortion in the measurement of movement. In my opinion, this is the best!

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

Have you tried the Casio/Bechstein Grand Hybrids? They have real hammers that strike sensors. I am not a classically trained pianist, but I find that their keyboard feels better than any digital piano I have ever tried... I think someone on this forum (bm?) uses a GR500 to control Pianoteq. I wish they made a controller-only version of that!

scherbakov.al wrote:

In my opinion, if the keyboard does not have a real grand piano mechanism, then you will not get enough true feel when playing. The problem is that keyboard "simulators" usually are "sticky" or "heavy" to play. This applies to all and even the best representatives of such keyboards. This heaviness arises from the almost direct relationship between the key and the hammer. You need to "press" the key with sufficient force to the very bottom. And press all the way down. It's just that real keyboards have a lot of inertia, and the pianist usually plays with it when playing. Electronic instrument keyboards have little or no inertia. This is one point. The second point is that after pressing the hammer will be caught and holding the key down requires a very small amount of force. In simulators, holding the key on the bottom requires full force to hold the hammer in place. Therefore, simulators are tiresome for a long game, they are more "dumb" in sensations, they do not allow you to easily perform fast passages on the pianissimo, have ease of performance in quick and easy passages, and practice fast rehearsal repetitions well. A real keyboard can be quite heavy, but not tedious to play, unlike digital instrument keyboards.

Good research:

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01193708

It seems to me that the acceleration graph reflects well the peculiarities of the keyboard and mechanics. It is in the relationship of the applied forces and accelerations that one must stop the gaze when researching and developing keyboards.

The optical sensors under the keys are impressive in their technology, but they cannot fully simulate the movement of the hammer, which has many complex movements due to the peculiarities of the mechanism + vibration mode of the hammer itself.
From this it turns out that the best option is to use optical sensors from the project:

https://github.com/ekumanov/cybrid/

Here you have a real keyboard, getting information from the hammer in the right place and optics that do not introduce any distortion in the measurement of movement. In my opinion, this is the best!

PT 7.3 with Steinway B and D, U4 upright, YC5, Bechstein DG, Steingraeber, Ant. Petrov, Kremsegg Collection #2, Electric Pianos and Hohner Collection. http://antoinewcaron.com

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

aWc wrote:

Have you tried the Casio/Bechstein Grand Hybrids? They have real hammers that strike sensors. I am not a classically trained pianist, but I find that their keyboard feels better than any digital piano I have ever tried... I think someone on this forum (bm?) uses a GR500 to control Pianoteq. I wish they made a controller-only version of that!

scherbakov.al wrote:

In my opinion, if the keyboard does not have a real grand piano mechanism, then you will not get enough true feel when playing. The problem is that keyboard "simulators" usually are "sticky" or "heavy" to play. This applies to all and even the best representatives of such keyboards. This heaviness arises from the almost direct relationship between the key and the hammer. You need to "press" the key with sufficient force to the very bottom. And press all the way down. It's just that real keyboards have a lot of inertia, and the pianist usually plays with it when playing. Electronic instrument keyboards have little or no inertia. This is one point. The second point is that after pressing the hammer will be caught and holding the key down requires a very small amount of force. In simulators, holding the key on the bottom requires full force to hold the hammer in place. Therefore, simulators are tiresome for a long game, they are more "dumb" in sensations, they do not allow you to easily perform fast passages on the pianissimo, have ease of performance in quick and easy passages, and practice fast rehearsal repetitions well. A real keyboard can be quite heavy, but not tedious to play, unlike digital instrument keyboards.

Good research:

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01193708

It seems to me that the acceleration graph reflects well the peculiarities of the keyboard and mechanics. It is in the relationship of the applied forces and accelerations that one must stop the gaze when researching and developing keyboards.

The optical sensors under the keys are impressive in their technology, but they cannot fully simulate the movement of the hammer, which has many complex movements due to the peculiarities of the mechanism + vibration mode of the hammer itself.
From this it turns out that the best option is to use optical sensors from the project:

https://github.com/ekumanov/cybrid/

Here you have a real keyboard, getting information from the hammer in the right place and optics that do not introduce any distortion in the measurement of movement. In my opinion, this is the best!

hee hee .. it's funny:

https://youtu.be/ZhbkRYVPkSc

but better nouvo kawai...

Last edited by scherbakov.al (10-09-2020 19:37)

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

I ordered the Lachnit Mk23 88 Studio last week, I hope it's good!

Last edited by Mk4UmHa (11-09-2020 06:08)

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

I know I would like to hear very much any MIDI file with Hi-res CC#88 data from the Lachnit Mk23 88 Studio, if Mk4UmHa you’ll want to post any.

Once you get your keyboard, if you post a Hi-res CC#88 MIDI example, other forum members also will have something to compare it to some of the Yamaha Disklavier MIDI XP file examples.  Many are at this site and for them to tell maybe once and for all whether or not MIDI having Hi-res CC#88 data from the Lachnit Mk23 88 Studio can sound just as good if not better, and, as detailed as any Yamaha Disklavier recording (MIDI XP).

Incidentally, Mk4UmHa, I share your opinion about Bose system speakers.  They really reproduce acoustic instrument sounds accurately.  They came to my attention initially while I was stationed at Mannheim.  (But, before then I had been a member of a few orchestras.  Which immediately came to my mind again when I for the first time listened to the clarity of some of the Bose speakers.  They had sounded to me as though I were while in Mannheim really listening to a live orchestra instead of just speakers.)

Man, simply amazing!

Pianoteq 8 Studio Bundle, Pearl malletSTATION EM1, Roland (DRUM SOUND MODULE TD-30, HandSonic 10, AX-1), Akai EWI USB, Yamaha DIGITAL PIANO P-95, M-Audio STUDIOPHILE BX5, Focusrite Saffire PRO 24 DSP.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

scherbakov wrote:

but better nouvo kawai...

what do you mean?

Last edited by aWc (13-09-2020 21:21)
PT 7.3 with Steinway B and D, U4 upright, YC5, Bechstein DG, Steingraeber, Ant. Petrov, Kremsegg Collection #2, Electric Pianos and Hohner Collection. http://antoinewcaron.com

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

aWc wrote:

scherbakov wrote:

but better nouvo kawai...

what do you mean?

https://www.kawai-global.com/product/nv10/

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

That Kawai Novus NV10 seems to have settled for standard MIDI, as opposed to Hi-res CC#88 MIDI and unlike the Lachnit Mk23 88 Studio.  Which to the contrary along with PIANOTEQ permits the greater resolution among the two keyboards.

I myself may want to contact Robert Estrin and find out whether or not he’s aware of PIANOTEQ and wants to make his hybrid Hi-res CC#88 MIDI compatible.

Perhaps I’ll procrastinate or wait and see if he’s just got his own agenda, like Kawai.

Last edited by Amen Ptah Ra (14-09-2020 14:33)
Pianoteq 8 Studio Bundle, Pearl malletSTATION EM1, Roland (DRUM SOUND MODULE TD-30, HandSonic 10, AX-1), Akai EWI USB, Yamaha DIGITAL PIANO P-95, M-Audio STUDIOPHILE BX5, Focusrite Saffire PRO 24 DSP.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

I'd just leave them be.

Amen Ptah Ra wrote:

That Kawai Novus NV10 seems to have settled for standard MIDI, as opposed to Hi-res CC#88 MIDI and unlike the Lachnit Mk23 88 Studio.  Which to the contrary along with PIANOTEQ permits the greater resolution among the two keyboards.

I myself may want to contact Robert Estrin and find out whether or not he’s aware of PIANOTEQ and wants to make his hybrid Hi-res CC#88 MIDI compatible.

Perhaps I’ll procrastinate or wait and see if he’s just got his own agenda, like Kawai.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

I brought my setup over to my friend's place 2 years ago. This is the reason why I returned to playing pianos from a 22 year haitus.

https://youtu.be/lxlJjcKJO9c


This is from a few weeks ago, my buddy just likes to make creepy sounds and the setup blew him away.... he was amazed that pianos could sound like that.
I added the Bose B2 Bass for deeper bass that you get from a 9ft.

https://youtu.be/0l8bM4ozhBc


Amen Ptah Ra wrote:

I know I would like to hear very much any MIDI file with Hi-res CC#88 data from the Lachnit Mk23 88 Studio, if Mk4UmHa you’ll want to post any.

Once you get your keyboard, if you post a Hi-res CC#88 MIDI example, other forum members also will have something to compare it to some of the Yamaha Disklavier MIDI XP file examples.  Many are at this site and for them to tell maybe once and for all whether or not MIDI having Hi-res CC#88 data from the Lachnit Mk23 88 Studio can sound just as good if not better, and, as detailed as any Yamaha Disklavier recording (MIDI XP).

Incidentally, Mk4UmHa, I share your opinion about Bose system speakers.  They really reproduce acoustic instrument sounds accurately.  They came to my attention initially while I was stationed at Mannheim.  (But, before then I had been a member of a few orchestras.  Which immediately came to my mind again when I for the first time listened to the clarity of some of the Bose speakers.  They had sounded to me as though I were while in Mannheim really listening to a live orchestra instead of just speakers.)

Man, simply amazing!

Last edited by Mk4UmHa (22-09-2020 06:07)

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

Mk4UmHa wrote:

I'd just leave them be.

Amen Ptah Ra wrote:

That Kawai Novus NV10 seems to have settled for standard MIDI, as opposed to Hi-res CC#88 MIDI and unlike the Lachnit Mk23 88 Studio.  Which to the contrary along with PIANOTEQ permits the greater resolution among the two keyboards.

I myself may want to contact Robert Estrin and find out whether or not he’s aware of PIANOTEQ and wants to make his hybrid Hi-res CC#88 MIDI compatible.

Perhaps I’ll procrastinate or wait and see if he’s just got his own agenda, like Kawai.

Where big corporations are concerned sometimes you have to show some balls, man; demand satisfaction: customer satisfaction, even as a potential customer.

I just feel musicians today ain’t the eunuchs of Ancient Rome!

Last edited by Amen Ptah Ra (24-09-2020 16:26)
Pianoteq 8 Studio Bundle, Pearl malletSTATION EM1, Roland (DRUM SOUND MODULE TD-30, HandSonic 10, AX-1), Akai EWI USB, Yamaha DIGITAL PIANO P-95, M-Audio STUDIOPHILE BX5, Focusrite Saffire PRO 24 DSP.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

I bought a MP-11 (demo-ex) a year ago and I really love the keys! (I think it’s the same key bed in MP-11SE).

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

IanL wrote:

....

I doubt, by the way, that the hi-res velocity sensing (if that is what it is) would make the slightest difference to me. I work in Pianoteq with a restricted velocity range (ie less than 127 steps) because that is what seems to work best with the N1X, in my hands anyway. So I'm maybe working with the range 20 - 100 (can't remember exactly off-hand) and that's still plenty of resolution for me. Maybe I just play like an oaf, but I wouldn't be surprised if 20 velocity steps was enough. I certainly don't think I could reproduce 20 different 'weights' reliably.

Ian.

I've wondered about the resolution question, too. I mean, how many shades from ppp thru fff can we really control, no matter how expressive we think we're being? So your post has inspired me to create a few crude stepped velocity curves. Curiously, while anything under 8 steps sounds proportionately lumpy (as one might expect), by the time I get up to 8 steps -- one for each of the traditional dynamic levels (Velocity = [0, 16, 17, 33, 33, 51, 51, 69, 69, 87, 88, 101, 102, 114, 114, 124; 4, 4, 19, 19, 37, 37, 57, 57, 76, 76, 96, 96, 112, 112, 127, 127]) -- it starts to sound pretty damned acceptable. But it really does seem like the relatively smooth velocity curves are indeed a better handmaiden for dynamic expression, even if we can't control the dynamics with anywhere near 127-degree precision. I assume it's the continuous shades we hear that make for the more satisfying result. But it would be an interesting double-blind experiment to see how few steps need to exist under those MIDI velocity curves before adding more of them makes no discernible difference to the trained ear. I'm really skeptical it would be more than 127.

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

S_G_B wrote:

But it would be an interesting double-blind experiment to see how few steps need to exist under those MIDI velocity curves before adding more of them makes no discernible difference to the trained ear. I'm really skeptical it would be more than 127.

I suspect that the number of steps needed is considerably less than 127. It would indeed be interesting to 'know', by some means, for example your suggestion of a 'double-blind' experiment. But, from my experience, such an experiment would be fraught with pitfalls of design and interpretation. For example, much of what we hear as emphasis depends on context. And organists, without the benefit of touch sensitivity, create stress through timing and in particular by manipulating the gap between notes.

I think it was Schumacher (of 'Small is Beautiful' fame) who said something along the lines that how certainly you could know something and how interesting a thing it was to know are inversely proportional.

I.

N1X - PT Pro - Linux

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

I finally received the MK23 88, it's very good, incidentally, I thought I  was hearing things, but my wife also said the Piano sounds different with this keyboard. They sound much more "full" and have a lot more color especially on the Steinway D. Before I would only use the Steinway D for about 5 - 10 minutes before switching over to the Bluthner because it didn't sound right. Now I find myself playing it for over an Hour with no issues, for whatever reason, there's better responses/control/touch to the pianos.

What ever FL did to simulate hammer strikes physically translates to PianoTeq really well. I had to remove the "voicing" on my setup because of how PianoTeq interpreted the velocity.

In the end, the Grotrain, Bluthner, Steinway D on my setup sound the very real now, CC88 is very nice if your speakers can reproduce sounds like a real instrument, there's alot more variation to the frequencies that I think translates to more dissonance the "color" that I'm hearing that PianoTeq models.

The rest of the Piano Models, I'm not sure yet since some parts of them sound synthetic a few milliseconds after the hammer strikes.

Amen Ptah Ra wrote:

I know I would like to hear very much any MIDI file with Hi-res CC#88 data from the Lachnit Mk23 88 Studio, if Mk4UmHa you’ll want to post any.

Once you get your keyboard, if you post a Hi-res CC#88 MIDI example, other forum members also will have something to compare it to some of the Yamaha Disklavier MIDI XP file examples.  Many are at this site and for them to tell maybe once and for all whether or not MIDI having Hi-res CC#88 data from the Lachnit Mk23 88 Studio can sound just as good if not better, and, as detailed as any Yamaha Disklavier recording (MIDI XP).

Incidentally, Mk4UmHa, I share your opinion about Bose system speakers.  They really reproduce acoustic instrument sounds accurately.  They came to my attention initially while I was stationed at Mannheim.  (But, before then I had been a member of a few orchestras.  Which immediately came to my mind again when I for the first time listened to the clarity of some of the Bose speakers.  They had sounded to me as though I were while in Mannheim really listening to a live orchestra instead of just speakers.)

Man, simply amazing!

Last edited by Mk4UmHa (09-10-2020 15:34)

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

Since I have a Kawai MP11SE, I'll say that.

Kawai MP11SE / Pianoteq Pro Studio Bundle v7.5.2 (includes every Pianoteq instrument - 21 currently)

Re: Best controller recommendations (spare no expense)

MP11 has been very much to my liking. I'd look at the current SE or equiv if/when I upgrade.

Pianoteq Studio Bundle (Pro plus all instruments)  - Kawai MP11 digital piano - Yamaha HS8 monitors