Topic by sigasa

  • Avatar
  • sigasa
  • Member
  • Offline
  • From: UK
  • Registered: 09-01-2008
  • Posts: 2,014

Topic: Exact is not the same as perfect!

http://www.forum-pianoteq.com/uploads.p...think_.mp3

Hi All,

We don't want exact!!! I say this to make a point. I have been mistaking exact for perfection! My wife is perfect but she is not exactly symetrical.

A flower is perfect, but it will never be exactly the same as another.

The same is true of sound. Pure sound is not the same as music. Pure sound is synthesis. Pure sound is simply singular sound, unmixed, unblended, without mixture, one. However, music must have more than one sound. A string when excited produces a miriad of sounds! One string, many sounds. Pure sound has no soul, no life, no heart, no emotion.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pure

Perfection in it's truest sense, as I now realise, is exact or alone or without anything or anyone else. It's been said, variety is the spice of life. This is true. True creativity cannot be found at the hands of a robot or machine. Mass produced exactness is the norm for the west, air brushed media, etc. etc.. Music must be different, or else it is not music.

My point???

I found two notes (there probably are more) on my keybed that are 'exact' in their sound. When played together they sound aweful. I understand now that a piano was never meant to be 'perfectly in tune'! I made the mistake of thinking that a pure or exact piano would sound 'perfect'! Wrong!

So, I will now bring close the most wayward velocities, but shall not make it exact, even though it IS POSSIBLE to do this with PianoTeq inconjunction with PNOscan and WinNessie/Midi9 calibration software.

I'll post more if there's any interest,

Best regards,

Chris

Reply by varpa

  • Avatar
  • varpa
  • Member
  • Offline
  • From: Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
  • Registered: 26-02-2011
  • Posts: 165

Re: Exact is not the same as perfect!

I find your project fascinating.  I agree that at a certain point you probably have optimized the performance to a very high level and that after that differences are a matter of artistic preference.   It would be quite nice if you could document your experience in building this keyboard so that others could benefit from your hard work.

varpa's Website

Reply by jcfelice88keys

  • Avatar
  • jcfelice88keys
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 22-09-2008
  • Posts: 1,149

Re: Exact is not the same as perfect!

Hello Chris,

Thank you for your thoughtful analysis of perfection and exactness in terms of pianos' sounds and their corresponding playabilities.  As one who has contributed many demos to the Pianoteq website, I can state with confidence that I have manipulated every stock .fxp in my Pianoteq arsenal so as to deviate from the mathematically precise perfection in tuning, touch, strike point, hammer hardness -- etc., etc., etc., -- over the scale of the keyboard.

Of course, I agree that Modartt probably takes the "moral" path in terms of tuning and the other aspects of its physically modeled pianos.  The great aspect of Pianoteq software is that one has the option (if he/she chooses) to "operate" on the piano and make many subtle (and therefore, organic) changes to the sounds of individual notes.

I would also agree that a little of this deviation from perfection goes a long way.  One can ruin the sound of a Pianoteq .fxp by overdoing the changes.  As a rule of thumb, if you can readily "hear" the changes in sound or touch response, then you may have done too much change to the sound!

If one wishes to have strict "perfection" -- whatever that means -- you only need to visit a big-box discount department store that sells cheap Casio (or similar) toy keyboards.  In those cases, there is essentially zero difference from note-to-note in terms of velocity response [it's all bad!], timbre/overtones [they're all sampled from essentially the very same single note!], touch [it's all horribly springy feeling], ... well, you get my point.

Thanks again, Chris, for starting this thoughtful thread.


Cheers,

Joe

Last edited by jcfelice88keys (22-10-2011 03:18)

Reply by jcfelice88keys

  • Avatar
  • jcfelice88keys
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 22-09-2008
  • Posts: 1,149

Re: Exact is not the same as perfect!

Hello again, Chris,

As a follow-up to my previous comment to this thread, I would like to share with you an experience in the natural imperfection of a real-world acoustic piano, a 5'8" K.Kawai I tuned just yesterday:

Upon having tuned C3 to C4 (middle C), and minimizing the "warble" in overtones between these two notes, I proceeded to tune C2 to C3.   I must have spent several minutes tuning -- and re-tuning -- this single octave, because I could not align the harmonic overtones to my satisfaction!  If I aligned the even overtones (the natural octaves) between notes, I heard a horribly warbling high B-flat (seventh overtone) in the harmonic series.  If I minimized that horrible high B-flat overtone, then I started hearing a warbling interval of a twelfth (e.g., the third harmonics would not align).

Such is the case of the term "inharmonicity" in relatively short grand pianos:  The overtone series does not follow the strictly integer-numbered multiples of the fundamental frequency.
It is also possible that one of the strings had a twist in it, meaning that I would NEVER get the unison tuning perfectly aligned.   This points out the real-world concerns that one encounters when tuning -- or performing on -- a reasonably well-maintained piano.

For your information.

Cheers,

Joe

Reply by sigasa

  • Avatar
  • sigasa
  • Member
  • Offline
  • From: UK
  • Registered: 09-01-2008
  • Posts: 2,014

Re: Exact is not the same as perfect!

Joe,

Thank you for you valuable and insightful contributions.

Much appreciated,

Kind Regards,

Chris

Reply by Klemperer

  • Avatar
  • Klemperer
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 14-06-2008
  • Posts: 262

Re: Exact is not the same as perfect!

A highly worthwhile read all around. Many of us are not able to tune a real piano , but the read here, and Sigasa's superb insight, is one thing more that makes me happy to be a pianoteq user. My love was the Bechstein as I bought a license (and still is, I just would love to know more how to shape the sound in the pro edition^^). Indeed, it is the same way in many other things (I am  a writer) - perfection can be extremely boring, like all life is - gone elsewhere.

Reply by Pianotrancer

  • Avatar
  • Pianotrancer
  • Member
  • Offline
  • From: Harrow, England
  • Registered: 07-08-2007
  • Posts: 138

Re: Exact is not the same as perfect!

I rarely (hardly ever) play a real piano. (Space and budget don't allow) But I did get to a couple of weeks ago. The Imperfections sounded absolutely beautiful. They were probably more pronounced after too many years of listening to "perfect" pianos