How do you name a sample instrument?

dore_m

So recently on the Pianobook Discord channel, they posted more rules regarding what constitutes owning and distributing the samples. In so doing, they mentioned that in the future, some of the free sample libraries may need to remove "Steinway" from their names. But because none of the libraries cost any money, they said it's just a pre-warning, just in case.

So it got me wondering how far the virtual piano libraries go in using the name brand of the piano that was sampled. Pianoteq purposely says that their libraries are licensed, so they must have permission. VSL uses the Bosendorfer, Bluthner and Yamaha names, but conspicuously removes Steinway in their "Concert D-274" library name - yet does not hide the name Steinway in their description.

Some sample libraries, like Synthology Ivory II Italian don't even mention Fazioli at all, even in the description, yet mention Steinway in the American Concert D description.

Do you think the number of times a piano manufacturer is named in a library is inversely proportional to probability of getting sued by that respective company?

I might have a "S" available to sample in the future - should I use "S" in the title?

QuasiUnaFantasia

You could start out calling it a Steinway, and if Steinway & Sons complain, you could offer to change the name to Stingray. 😁

Or, how about calling it "Ceci n'est pas une Steinway".

But the lettering used by Steinway is well known, so anything with the letter A, B, C, D, or O combined with the place of manufacture, or the length of the piano in centimeters would probably be fine names. Others have done similarly, as you point out yourself.

Drew-r

QuasiUnaFantasia

On the sub-topic of how S & S plays into the history of samples relevant to the OP’s inquiry here, i have similar wondering/questions re: rules/regulations/ownership of samples and works.

As best as i currently know, my HP508 is among the last remnants (lineage-wise) of Roland’s sample-based DP technology. I remember the dealer told me it’s samples are “based on Steinway Concert Grand Piano”, but i wondered then (late 2015) and continue to wonder today, what does this really mean? It’s not like S & S only had one CGP at that time for Roland to actually sample or somehow “base” their sample upon.

Works: In possibly a similar fashion, ive been led to believe that the overriding reason why my HP508 has 80+ classical masterpieces hidden in for-internal-use-only midi format, is to protect the ownership rights “works” of the present-day estates of the long dead piano masters - Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, Chopin, et. al.

dore_m

Mainly I think it's curious that VSL names all of their pianos EXCEPT the Steinway, so they are at least ballsy enough to use the other brand names. Yet what is with "Austrian Grand" and others? Is it that they won't use Steinway for fear of litigation, and thus just don't use the other names to be consistent?

I assume that Steinway was added to the VSL libraries AFTER Bosendorfer and Yamaha (?) and I wonder if they will use Fazioli in their future library….

dore_m

Drew-r Works: In possibly a similar fashion, ive been led to believe that the overriding reason why my HP508 has 80+ classical masterpieces hidden in for-internal-use-only midi format,

My guess is that they're not protecting the composer, but the person who performed the MIDI. Possibly they just copied the MIDI files from the internet without worrying about who made it. I doubt they paid someone to perform/midi-ize those pieces.

Frédéric L

VSL doesn’t name it Steinway, but use the Steinway logo on their interface !

SteinNewWay, Cseven, Petroph, BaldUpWin, Italian Piano, Alicia Grand. Guess which is which…..

Before Pianoteq Steinway D, we had for a long time a simple model D.

dore_m

Frédéric L Alicia Grand.

That sounds really illegal. Someone made a sample library from the NI Alicia's Keys. Is that library of pianos ALL knocked off?

edit: I just saw that there are youtube videos with demos of the pianos. Anyone care to play "which professional VST did they knockoff?" I know some of you own these libraries.

Drew-r

Frédéric L

In like fashion, HP508 has several EP voices, to include those they/somebody real or corporate, for some reason, named “vintage EP” and “classic EP” , which turn out to sound like well-known brand-name EPs such as Rhodes, Wurlitzer.

MP7 also has many EP voices, and Drawbar Organs, some which Kawai named something generic despite 2 of them sounding like the same familiar Wurli and Rhodes EPs and the organ sounding like the old, familiar Hammond B3 🤔.

The lack of widespread disclosure in these matters goes a long way towards propagating whatever theories there are as substitutes for whatever the realities are.

Drew-r

dore_m My guess is that they're not protecting the composer, but the person who performed the MIDI. Possibly they just copied the MIDI files from the internet without worrying about who made it.

Looks/sounds somewhat plausible. Whatever the basis reason really is, it seems safe to say Yamaha, Kawai and the like all equip some of their models with classical masterpiece “demo songs” on the same basis. The uninformed are free to believe these songs demonstrate a given model’s piano-playing chops whereas the informed know this only demonstrates the internal-recording-play-back chops.

Among the unanswered mysteries to me is the contrast between Roland as a potential plaintiff bringing litigation against a purveyor of VI samples when, to begin with, Roland has never had its own acoustic pianos to sample; versus Roland as a potential defendant in litigation brought by a midi-composer plaintiff…. plus or minus that, there is always that element of how some corporate entities are able to exploit poetic / artistic license.

dore_m

Drew-r Among the unanswered mysteries to me is the contrast between Roland as a potential plaintiff bringing litigation against a purveyor of VI samples when, to begin with, Roland has never had its own pianos to sample; versus Roland as a potential defendant in litigation brought by a midi-composer plaintiff…. plus or minus that, there is always that element of how some corporate entities are able to exploit poetic / artistic license.

Interesting point. Roland, I'm pretty sure, is very very protective of their sounds. You do not see many (if any) sample libraries of Roland sounds. So possibly they practice what they preach - they don't use other brand names in their sampled instruments.