Ecaroh wrote:Key Fumbler wrote:Ecaroh wrote:Here’s just a general and quite obvious statement:
We are the most sensitive to (acoustic) instruments we know best and play daily. For example I have two acoustic vibraphones (Musser and Malletech) and I’d say I know Rhodes e-piano quite well. To my ears these are sounds and PTQ models that I could easily distinguish from real ones and to my ears there’s much for improvement. In fact I must admit that PTQ Rhodes is the model I would never use. To my ears it’s just so far from real one. Vibraphone is ok, but there’s still lot to improve. On the other hand Vibes is typically a sound which all these companies do not pay much attention, so PTQ vibes is (although not perfect) one of the best.
I can’t say much about historical pianos or hapsichords. To my amateur ears those sound nice. Obviously I do not hear the nuances like harpsichordist. I think same goes with every instrument but also goes with Modartt. They themselves have most ”ears” for pianos and thus they have put the most effort to them as well which is of course wise. With specialities like Vibes they haven’t got same ”ears” and probably ambition level is also bit lower.
This is not critic, just a thought how things go naturally…
Probably true.
I actually really like the Rhodes models and now the Wurly and Clavs but I don't have the real deal to compare like you so I'm not so discerning - I have the luxury of ignorance!
They just sounds great comparing well with Rhodes on recordings when the presets are edited and layered with FX. Not like experiencing the full mechanical nature of the real deal like you've had.
Do try mono out to stereo FX though - if you haven't already. That makes them sound more authentic to me.
To be precise I DO NOT have a real Rhodes but I am quite familiar with that instrument. I have played different Rhodes's and listened my whole life to it. In practical reasons I use nowadays Clavia Nords E-piano. That's a company which have put their soul to Rhodes sound. If you doubt that just listen to newest Rhodes of their collection (https://www.nordkeyboards.com/sound-lib...-stockholm)
But sorry, this was not meant to take this thread to discussing Rhodes or Vibes. It was just my idea how we are different in our hearing in nuances. If someone is harpsichordist and plays acoustic H. often I would trust his/her opinion about its virtual replicant.
Maybe it's partly a question of individual instruments, room acoustics and psychological bias?
A player who is used to a particular vintage of the real instruments, when heard in a particular room compare against the models played with the right velocity curve for the instrument..
So many variables. Of course it can all still get better.
Like the harpsichords two Rhodes can be tuned to sound very different. Though of course there has to be a decent amount of fundamental accuracy to the model for that to be relevant.
I don't really have your direct experience with the real thing. I have been listening to Rhodes recordings for decades - albeit mostly dripping with tape and digital delays of various forms, chorus, flange and reverb FX from plates to springs to 80s digital FX, eq and compression. Quite often listening to the instrument on its own, but that's not like experiencing in the flesh, under your own fingertips.
EDIT: Can the Rhodes get better sure. I'm not convinced Modartt's efforts are actually inferior to the Nord examples, just different, because different Rhodes sound different.
Nord's music demos for the Rhodes Mk1 sounds in your example are probably much better sales demos to Modartt's chosen efforts in this regard be fair (that's not to knock the performers or their production, just that Nord's music examples are probably more suited to most listeners expectations) - and that's an amazingly capable Mk1 Nord have recreated in the samples of your chosen example there, with a round sound and crystal crispy bell like highs and also the barky sound too. Hopefully the Rhodes models will get more music demos with more carefully crafted presets when the models are further adjusted/improved in the future.
Personally I find the electric pianos highly convincing and it's probably easier to replicate those than any acoustic instruments, and this is why for me they're more able to fool my ears than the (still excellent) acoustic models.
Several companies have also made pretty convincing Rhodes physical models in hardware and software, whereas Modartt are clearly head and shoulders above the competition for modeling acoustic pianos.
I would love to hear further improvements in the modelling of course.
Sorry to continue with the derailling of the Harpsichord thread.
Last edited by Key Fumbler (28-04-2024 23:24)
