Piano Sample Libraries vs Internal DP sounds

vagfilm

I think this seems like an interesting topic and deserves its own thread. Let's keep it clean and duke-it-out here.

God Bless,
David

I really don't want to derail this, but @Deleted : would you care to explain why do you think that piano makers samples are perfect for live playing through speakers (even that dexibell that is triggered by midi), while VSTs (VSL, garritan, VILabs, whatever...) are not fit for speakers. What kind of voodoo happens in the WAVs of VSTs that makes them unable to follow live midi commands? If you care to reply, please start a new thread, so not to derail this...

Deleted

vagfilm While this forum is pretty well versed in MIDI controller technology and DAW software, it's missing the audio engineering background leading up to such questions. The "kind of voodoo" that happens in between is called "recording", which is part of audio engineering.

VST samples are ready-made single note piano recordings, which are arranged by the user to give the impression of an actual polyphonic piano recording. As a result a VST recording mix created with a controller is nothing more than convoluted MIDI file. You can actually recreate the MIDI file by processing the VST output comparing them to the samples. (This how MIDI guitars, MIDI violins and other MIDIfied string instruments actually work.)

Dry DP samples are carefully processed to be played through speaker cabinets instead. For mid-range DPs upwards, the samples are actually adjusted to their respective cabinet they get delivered in. That's why it's absolutely useless to USB-record digital pianos (which sounds awful). While OTOH it's useless to play finished VST piano recordings through an actual piano cabinet. The grand piano cabinet, the recording hall and the whole recording engineering is already baked into the VST samples. You're just arranging them to be then played back through neutral amplification / cinema speakers / car hifi / headphones etc.

I'm just pointing this out, so our DIY guys don't get disappointed when they end up with "I built a piano cabinet speaker and it sounds bad", when it's just the audio source, which is unsuitable, while the speaker cabinet might be actually perfectly fine if you feed with a suitable audio source.

David B

Deleted What's the difference if a piano maker tailors a sound to a particular cabinet compared to that cabinet reproducing the sound via recording of another studio/VST? Why is one objectively better than the other? Arguably one is based on reality (VST) while the other is based on imagination (internal sound). By imagination I mean what the manufacturer thinks their piano might sound like in various settings. E.g., my Yamaha P125 has several reverb options, concert hall, recital hall, jazz club, etc., I don't think Yamaha recorded their CF3S in all those settings. Those reverbs options are what they imagine it might sound like.

However, my VSL Bösenderfer Imperial is an actual recording of what their instrument sounds like in that actual studio. It's closer to reality than the imagined reverb of the Yamaha. I don't think one is better than the other. Why do you think one is objectively better than the other?

God Bless,
David

Johnstaf

Deleted VST samples are ready-made single note piano recordings, which are arranged by the user to give the impression of an actual polyphonic piano recording. As a result a VST recording mix created with a controller is nothing more than convoluted MIDI file. You can actually recreate the MIDI file by processing the VST output comparing them to the samples. (This how MIDI guitars, MIDI violins and other MIDIfied string instruments actually work.)

This is exactly what happens in a DP as well.

Deleted The grand piano cabinet, the recording hall and the whole recording engineering is already baked into the VST samples.

This is one reason why VSTs through speakers/headphones sound better that DPs. You can use very dry samples as well, and process them however you like (with reverb for example) if that's what you prefer. The biggest advantage of VSTs is they don't suffer from the need to have tiny sample sets.

vagfilm

Ok... As I thought, you are simply repeating ad nauseam an argument based on what seems like prejudice. If it would boils down to "dryness" there are a number of dry VST (even recorded at anechoic chambers) while anyone would be hard pressed to say that the dexibell vivo module is dry.
End of OT...

Deleted

vagfilm Ok... As I thought, you are simply repeating ad nauseam an argument based on what seems like prejudice.

Why do I even waste my time with replying to your posts. You're not even interested in learning something. You're just here to create discord to feed your dopamine system, because you have nothing else going on in your life. That's why you're already produced 625 posts on this forum, which almost 10 % of the total amount. Get a life!

David B

Deleted Why do I even waste my time with replying to your posts. You're not even interested in learning something. You're just here to create discord to feed your dopamine system, because you have nothing else going on in your life. That's why you're already produced 625 posts on this forum, which almost 10 % of the total amount. Get a life!

Yikes! That's really uncalled for, Joe. So he feels your opinion is unreasonable (prejudiced). Debate the topic, don't attack the person. It sounds like an interesting topic and if you'd like I can move these posts to a new thread where it can be fleshed out more.

God Bless,
David

MacMacMac

Deleted Why do I even waste my time with replying to your posts.

I think the question is: Why does vagfilm waste his time on your posts? He's been utterly polite to you ... almost obsequious. He does not deserve your condescending attitude.

vagfilm

Thanks for keeping track. Will try to find a life to live. Deeply appreciate your concern.

Deleted

David B Yikes! That's really uncalled for, Joe. So he feels your opinion is unreasonable (prejudiced). Debate the topic, don't attack the person. It sounds like an interesting topic and if you'd like I can move these posts to a new thread where it can be fleshed out more.

One the reasons why the disadvantages of discussing things anonymously online outweigh the advantages is because some people with lots time on their hands just register there to be contrary and drive you off. And in the long term they succeed.

Del Vento

David B What's the difference if a piano maker tailors a sound to a particular cabinet compared to that cabinet reproducing the sound via recording of another studio/VST?

Yes, I've often seen people debating this issue, and strongly so as the personal derail between @vagfilm and @Deleted demonstrates even in this case.

Frankly I don't fully understand either camp, so I'd appreciate it very much if both camps (not necessarily the same persons) would elaborate further from a technical perspective.

I suppose it is related to the issue (also often debated strongly) of some things like Pianoteq being more playable than "simply recorded" virtual instruments, and I (think that I partially) understand that. A piano made for live playing is made for a persons who constantly adjust the future playing based on the feedback they hear; playing; whereas a "simply recorded" virtual instrument is made for a fixed MIDI recording in which one constantly "goes back in the past" and re-renders (sometimes ad nauseam) searching for the best sound for the whole thing.

MacMacMac He's been utterly polite to you ... almost obsequious. He does not deserve your condescending attitude.

FWIW, I agree with you MacMacMac

MacMacMac Why does vagfilm waste his time on your posts?

IMHO there is value in this discussion, and I really hate to see it being derailed by emotions, as much as I love to hear music which is instead conveying such emotions! Hope the two of them make peace and the discussion continues.

dore_m

I'll second what @Del Vento said. I think I avoided even reading discussions on this topic before because after threads get too long, its hard to get to the heart of the issue.

Is this the pianoteq vs sampled library discussion, are DP internal sounds modeled usually nowadays (my DP is definitely modeled - from the 80's). After sampling a few pianos now, I know a little bit about the recording engineering.

It just seems to me that DP's are mass marketed devices that meet a certain need/market. They are optimized given their restrictions and resources. So they can either sample or model a great piano, and make sure that the output from the speakers or cabinet matches the real thing, or optimally pleasing to the target user. Their design choices match their business restrictions.

We DIY'ers are essentially doing the same thing, but customizing to our personal preferences given our resources and abilities.

Both are good and meet different needs. The chain of resources, design, optimization, and manufacture are just different.

navindra

dore_m Is this the pianoteq vs sampled library discussion, are DP internal sounds modeled usually nowadays (my DP is definitely modeled - from the 80's). After sampling a few pianos now, I know a little bit about the recording engineering.

The high-end Kawai and Yamaha digitals use a combination of sampling + modeling quite successfully.

Roland is one of the biggest brands that uses modeling almost exclusively and relatively successfully. David owned an FP-30X briefly, although this is not Roland's flagship. By many accounts Roland has done a tremendous job in terms of overall performance of the action+engine pairing.

Not many manufacturers actually use Pianoteq, but these tend to be super high-end products by acoustic piano makers. An example is Steingraeber:

https://www.steingraeber.de/en/innovationen/transducer/

Del Vento

Deleted One the reasons why the disadvantages of discussing things anonymously online outweigh the advantages is because some people with lots time on their hands just register there to be contrary and drive you off. And in the long term they succeed.

That is definitely true in general, but I don't think it applies to this case. I've been interacting with @vagfilm since day 1 of this forum (and a few years before on the other forum, assuming it's the same person, which as far as I can tell is the case), and he

does not have lots of time on his hands, but being passionate about piano and music he is willing to share with others what he knows and does (he has written some quite useful software and gave it away for free)
he's not contrary or try to drive people off, actually he's quite open to hear other people's opinions
Like everybody, he does have his own opinions, and on some I agree with him and others I don't, but that's normal life.

Perhaps you read something in between the lines of what he wrote that drove you off? As far as I can tell none of us saw that. Not saying such a thing isn't there, just that we haven't seen it. And having been in similar incidents in the past myself (as the poster who wrote "nasty" things), I can tell that sometimes the written words convey a different meaning that intended. So if you care about the relationship with this person (which I think you should, but it's your choice), I suggest that you talk to each other and clarify the misunderstanding (*). If you don't, well, I'm sorry to hear, but just move on.

Now, back to the topic that stirred this argument, I think it's a very interesting one, which as I wrote earlier I don't know much about. I appreciate hearing both sides, perhaps make some tests and critical listening (and I will need them to decide the sound engine for my DIY hybrid) and make my own opinion on the topic. As such, I'd love if we can go back on topic.

(*): If it's helpful, I am sure we can find a forum member to be a mediator -- I can be the one, but as I wrote I am closer to @vagfilm than I am to @Deleted so I might not be right person (however I have to say that I do follow @Deleted 's posts and I do like what you have to say, so I believe that, if called, I can be impartial)

Frédéric L

With my N1X and headphones, I am more happy with VST than with built-in sounds.

I have not many experiences with the speakers sound (and the N1X is a bit peculiar with its « spatial sampling » which should be better than stereo (about the sound projection).

vagfilm

Fellow clackers @David B , @MacMacMac, and Del Vento : thank you for your kind words about my participation in this forum, which were really unnecessary (but always nice to hear...). I am a grown man and although, apparently, I need to get a life of my own (good grief... how will I do that???), this not a school brawl and you don't need to take sides.
And the topic is also not worth of further discussion, therefore there is really nothing to intermediate: Joe will always maintain his opinion that samples recorded by piano makers are the only recordings pure enough to deserve to be airwaved to our ears; me and some others that live by the motto "a recording is a recording is a recording" will continue to be puzzled by that opinion but have learnt not to expect an explanation or any evidence that the samples of - let's say - a CLP725 vs a CLP785 are indeed different in their voodoo recording stage as Joe firmly believes and that the sonic adjustments made to account for the different speakers and cabinets do not boil down to equalization and frequency crossovers (virtual resonance engines aside, of course).