Today I had a chance to hear a demo CD which is put out by the Sweetwater Sound company. They had the most wonderfully accurate reproductions of piano sounds. They could even incorporate the sound of the soundboard itself and the sound of softer surface hammers etc. They had examples from YC concert Grands, S&S D's, Baldwins, Imperial B., Yamaha C3's and C7's etc. The sound was the most realistic I have ever heard. apparently these sound tracks can be loaded into a Kurzwild. Even the clumping sound of the dampers could be included along with pedal noise if preferred. The turning of pages was also included if desired. Jim Coleman, Sr. On Mon, 16 Feb 1998 atonal@planet.eon.net wrote: > > Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 11:51:05 -0700 > > To: pianotech@ptg.org > > From: John Musselwhite <musselj@cadvision.com> > > Subject: Re: Digitals-- > > Reply-to: pianotech@ptg.org > > > > > At 10:20 AM 2/15/98 -0500, Stephen wrote: > > > > >To clarify here, when I talk of the next generation these will not be > > >"digital". With "physical modelling" the input/output response itself is > > >modelled. Particular waveforms are not linked to particular input > > >combinations (interpreted from key motion). No matter how many of these > > > > This is what Sound Blaster is attempting to do with the Advanced Wave > > Effects (AWE) system they're using in the SB64 AWE and other cards. The > > technology uses what they call "sound fonts" that sit in RAM (4 megs of > > it!). The piano sound is still a little weak, but it's miles ahead of what > > it was on earlier sound cards. > > > > With all due respect to SoundBlaster and the sound font system (I own > an AWE32), Stephen is correct when he states that this technique > still depends on pre-existing samples, and is not a directly > triggered waveform response. The Damper Physical Modelling and > Natural String Resonance trademarks of General Music that I mentioned > in an earlier post is also dependent on pre-existing samples, but > they use post-processing techniques to bring these samples into play > when different keys and combinations thereof are struck, simulating > the responses inherent in a string-bridge-soundboard tone generation > system. > As of yet, no one manufacturer has embraced physical modelling as a > complete tone generation source, they are all dependent on refining > sampling techniques to a point where the average listener can't > distinguish a piece played on a digital and on a piano (blindfolded, > in the dark, and not playing the instrument). Some are quite good. > The Roland KR series digitals have a respectable grand piano > sound sample coupled with a powerful amplification system, > resulting in a realistic piano tone reproduction. According > to the dealer I work for, the new KR-1070 digital grand from > Roland is housed in a 5'8" grand case, and among other toys, > you get the choice of Steinway & Sons D (NY) sampled grand > sound, or with the flick of a button, Bosendorfer 290 sampled > sound. However, they don't address the damper-soundboard-string > modelling in the General Music digitals, and the difference is > noticeable. Also, the General Instrument RP series have a > rudimentary aftertouch 'bump' built into the keys, which the Rolands, > Korgs, and I believe, Yamahas don't. It doesn't give the pianist the > control over repetition and dynamics that pianos offer, but it's a > start. > It seems that there is a different market for digitals over pianos, > and this is not a bad thing. Church groups really go for the > digitals, as they are portable, can be hooked through a sound system, > and servicing is minimal. Before you protest, think of the number of > poorly serviced, inadequate, downright pathetic pianos you have tuned > in churches that really don't have the money to adequately maintain a > respectable piano. Ah, but that's a different post............... > > Still tuning those pianos & lovin' them, > > > > > Rob Kiddell, > Registered Piano Technician, PTG > atonal@planet.eon.net >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC