Action Comparison Between Roland PHA50 and Numa X GT TP400

David B · 2024-02-05T06:07:08+00:00

Looks like I'll be selling my FP90X this week so I wanted to make this video while I still had both pianos available. Do you think any of these differences would impact your playing? https://youtu.be/2_6t-Yg4hU0 God Bless, David

jdg78

That's rather odd and somewhat disappointing to hear. In any case, I'd already pretty much decided to go with the Numa X GT over the FP90x, so this just further cements that decision.

I'm actually more intrigued by the hint of something new upcoming from VI Labs, as they've been rather silent as of late. Really hoping it's a new grand piano, something with more mainstream appeal than the Ravenscroft or Modern U.

While I think the Modern U is practically flawless from a technical standpoint, I simply find the tone too small-scale and limited for my tastes and the types of music I like to play.

David B

vagfilm I wish I still had the FP90X to test. What I hear Lance saying is that the discrepancy is not inherently a midi problem, but rather the way Roland implements it in the FP90X.

I can't test it on my Numa because the TP400 doesn't allow finger sustain with either the internal sounds or as a midi controller.

God Bless,
David

CyberGene

I’m speculating but what I think that means is the ability to replay a note without triggering a release, which in MIDI language means repeated Note ON events without a Note OFF in between. That’s what finger sustain is.

Assuming the FP90X doesn’t support the above for MIDI, there are two possibilities:

The MIDI implementation would send Note OFF even when you release past the middle sensor. (Not sure where it’s placed along the key travel though but hopefully it’s not to close to bottom)
The MIDI implementation will send Note OFF when you release past the top sensor, however it won’t send repeated Note ON events if you release past the middle one and then repeat the key.

Both are not OK but the first one is somehow better because it will at least allow replaying keys that are partially released.

SouthPark

Will be interesting to also see what happens when the FP90X is not in 'controller' mode, and the recorded 'midi' is then exported - eg. go into a USB stick. I assume the FP90X allows its internal recorded midi files to be exported or transferred to USB stick. And then see if the 'three sensor' features/signatures appear within the midi.

vagfilm

Roland can use internally two consecutive note-on events, but cannot output it that way because then the first one would sound for as long as the second one and on top of it (imagine the result of that in non dampening sounds like organs!!!). A note-off message after the second note-on would mute both notes. Roland cannot guarantee that all the VSTs are ready to correctly process consecutive notes. So it needs to be conservative and always kill the first note before triggering the second.

Johnstaf

I have an FP90 -not an FP90X.

A dual sensor action requires the key to be raised to the note cutoff point before it's played again.

A triple sensor allows a note to be replayed from below the note cutoff point, like a grand piano action. My FP90 does this via MIDI.

Whether a note-off message is sent with the next note-on, the sample must still be retriggered and bypass the release sample. Surely it's up to the VST to decide how to do this. You can't have the same note playing twice.

Johnstaf

To clarify my previous point, when a note-on is received for a note that is already played, the software has to decide what to do with the new note, whether or not a note-off is received immediately before it or not.

In the case of Vienna Imperial, for example, there is no release sample triggered by a note-off message. If it is I can't hear it. The release samples are quite distinctive.

Is it possible note-off velocity was confused with the function of the triple-sensor action? Some digital pianos use note-off velocity internally, whether they send it via MIDI or not.

It's more than a little condescending to suggest that people don't know what a triple-sensor action is meant to do.

[deleted]

David B If this is not something you noticed while extensively testing the FP-90X, is it an actual issue?

David B

[deleted] If this is not something you noticed while extensively testing the FP-90X, is it an actual issue?

I guess it would be if you wanted to utilize finger sustain while using the FP90X as a midi controller. Here is some followup information from Lance with a quote from Roland.

As for the FP90X, here's the full reply from Roland support: "Our Roland engineers currently don’t have a solution for you. The MIDI implementation for the A-88 was different than it is for the FP-90X. The FP-90X is not really a MIDI controller in the same way the A-88 was. Both instruments were intended for different types of players. The focus of the FP-90X is on the internal sounds. The FP-90X is designed primarily to offer high-level expression from the keyboard and pedals for the internal sounds. The engineers did say they will look at the possibility of making changes to the FP models but they also said they can’t really promise anything."

God Bless,
David

HZPiano

Hello,

In any case I'm glad this information has surfaced (thanks Lance and @David B).

I more or less have the HP704 on my shortlist for a future upgrade; I like the looks and ergonomics of that model combined with the PHA-50 action and would use it as a controller just as I do my FP10. But if the same as discussed here for the FP90X applies to the HP704 then it's off the list.

I'm really glad my FP10 does the consecutive note-ons, only sending note-off after full (or high enough) release of the key. I'm also happy with the note-off velocities it sends.

And Modern U handles it all gracefully as you'd expect a real piano to do.

Cheers and happy playing,

PS As for "the great things coming from VI Labs", I'm of course quite keen to see what they come up with. I do hope a new VSTi piano of theirs that is technically at least at Modern U level, is sampled as close and in your face as U, and remains computer resource friendly as is Modern U.

HZPiano

HZPiano I'm really glad my FP10 does the consecutive note-ons, only sending note-off after full (or high enough) release of the key.

RECTIFICATION!!

😲

I just read a post by "pianistically" on PW (which in turn was triggered by this here thread) where they said to have done the test with PHA-4 and every note on is always followed by a note off with that action as well.

So I thought Well I'll be d* let me verify what I said before. I booted my setup and started MIDIOX's monitor window. Lo and behold… each note on is followed by a note off however low I play in the key's travel.

Thus Rectified: PHA-4 in my FP10 has the exact same MIDI output behavior as Lance reported for PHA-50 in the FP90X.

Somehow Modern U gives me the illusion (or has implemented a proper behavior) to keep ringing plus new attacks while sounding considerably more staccato when letting the key come further up before a restrike.

Cheers and happy fact checking (😲),

PS I'd swear to have seen multiple note ons followed by a single note off in the input monitor window in the past. It must have been with one of the pianos/controllers I tested before settling on the FP10 or with one or more of the Kawais I hooked up MIDIOX to during a store visit early in 2023.

HZPiano

Addendum:

I did notice that the note off messages in the cases of lifting the key only past the middle sensor before restrike are output with a note off velocity of 0, where note offs after passing the top sensor feature actual release velocity values.

Maybe -- and this is pure guesswork on my side -- Modern U (and other properly built VSTi pianos) use this release velocity==0 to not trigger release samples and that could explain the difference between "keep ringing plus a new hammer attack" and the more staccato impression on full release before restrike.

Anyway.

Cheers and happy legatos,

Johnstaf

I examined the MIDI stream from my FP90. When a note is held and restruck, a note-off value of 0 is transmitted together a note on velocity (at the same timestamp). When a note is fully released, a note-off message with a velocity value is sent.

I don't see how this is relevant for a piano VST. You can't have different versions of the same note playing together on a piano. The VST will have to stop the previous note and bypass the release sample whether the second note-on is accompanied by note-off or not. The FP90 triple-sensor action allows a one to be restruck from below the middle sensor, as it should.

kawafanboi

have you guys actually found engines which behave badly on actions? most of the modern stuff sounds pretty good to me.

vagfilm

Johnstaf You can't have different versions of the same note playing together on a piano.

That depends on the engine and the way they interpret the midi messages. For example, in Kontakt each note-on triggers one event of a particular note. If you program the script to ignore note-off messages if the velocity=0, then you can superimpose how many similar notes as you want. And when the damper "drops" you need to kill all ongoing notes one by one… So you need to program the script to maintain a record of all ongoing events.

It is exactly the same situation when it comes to silent notes. Some DP manufacturers send vel=0 messages, others don't; some VSTs require vel=0, others have a configurable threshold, and others don't even consider the possibility of silent notes…

Johnstaf

vagfilm That depends on the engine and the way they interpret the midi messages. For example, in Kontakt each note-on triggers one event of a particular note. If you program the script to ignore note-off messages if the velocity=0, then you can superimpose how many similar notes as you want. And when the damper "drops" you need to kill all ongoing notes one by one…

It is exactly the same situation when it comes to silent notes. Some DP manufacturers send vel=0 messages, others don't; some VSTs require vel=0, others have a configurable threshold, and others don't even consider the possibility of silent notes…

I meant you can't superimpose the same note on itself on a piano, especially a sampled piano which could have phase problems. A piano VST has to decide what to do when a note is restruck. The previous note has to be replaced one way or another.

You can't kill the notes one by one in MIDI unless the synth is multi-timbral, as you can't address each instance of the note individually.

My Kawai MP10 sends note-on velocity 0 instead of note-off IIRC.

vagfilm

Johnstaf You can't kill the notes one by one in MIDI unless the synth is multi-timbral.

Sure, but a sampler/engine does not kill notes: it kills samples. I assume that all samplers are multi-timbral by nature. It is up to the programmer to use the midi messages as he sees fit.

Another example of this: when a key is lifted with the pedal down, the DP sends a note-off message. That message is simply ignored IF the script is prepared to do that. Then when the pedal is raised all ongoing sustained notes need to be muted even though no new note-off messages are sent.

kawafanboi

vagfilm

Given up on kontakt, everything tuned to the max, 12900k lags, 7800x3d lags, what else can I do?

[deleted]

I suspect my technique is not good enough yet where I am noticing any issues when playing jazz and blues on my FP 90X paired with Noire. Using Pianoteq to reference midi output I can see that the FP90X will send a note off message the exact moment I repeat the same key. If I am playing two different keys legato style, the FP-90X only sends a note off message when the first key goes past it's usual note off point. Striking the second key does not make the FP-90X send a note off message on the first key if the first key is still below it's normal note off position. So whatever is happening under the hood is a non-issue for me but again, I'm not an advanced player so could just be blissful ignorance on my part.

SouthPark

When I use my two index fingers on the P-515 to do super fast 'trill' (for messing around only and testing), I can eventually trigger a max velocity note when the note/key doesn't get back to the 'normal' horizontal position. I don't usually use or do trills in my playing. So not an issue for me. But I think it touches on the importance of having enough sensors and algorithm for real time tracking position, direction, velocity etc of each key. This also requires adequate processing and measurement speeds, with a bunch of things going on. Also including how to handle cases such as repeated 'strike' of same note on 'string' when damper is not on the string.

But once again, I usually don‘t require lightning fast repeated note strikes to make me and the P series sound good. The FP90X sounds excellent too.

« Previous Page Next Page »