Discussion:
Self-Tuning Piano
(too old to reply)
e***@att.net
2012-01-20 22:42:40 UTC
Permalink


Don A. Gilmore
Kansas City
Sylvia Else
2012-01-22 11:06:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@att.net
http://youtu.be/ugAxXm2SAXw
Don A. Gilmore
Kansas City
Interesting concept, but strings stretch over time, and this device is
going to be limited in its ability to compensate for that. Perhaps
useful for keeping the piano in tune between manual tunings, but not a
substitute for them.

Sylvia.
J.B. Wood
2012-01-23 11:31:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@att.net
http://youtu.be/ugAxXm2SAXw
Don A. Gilmore
Kansas City
Hey, really super effort, Don. I wondered off and on where you were
with this project after a number of years had gone by. Sincerely,
--
J. B. Wood e-mail: ***@hotmail.com
J.B. Wood
2012-01-23 11:41:40 UTC
Permalink
Don,

In your U-toob video you demonstrate how a unison is brought back in
tune. Isn't it true in most pianos that by the time unisons get out of
tune that the piano is most likely way past when it should have been tuned?

Could your demo be amended to show how beats (say between fifths) can be
brought into line with equal temperament? Piano tuners usually save the
tuning of unisons as the last step in the process. Sincerely,
--
J. B. Wood e-mail: ***@hotmail.com
Michael Joel
2012-02-07 05:20:32 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 23 Jan 2012 06:31:37 -0500, "J.B. Wood"
Post by J.B. Wood
Post by e***@att.net
http://youtu.be/ugAxXm2SAXw
Don A. Gilmore
Kansas City
Hey, really super effort, Don. I wondered off and on where you were
with this project after a number of years had gone by. Sincerely,
I don't want to rain on a parade, but ...

If you are not listening to the string (posts say it is using
optical/magnetic) it must be using Music Theory. The problem is music
theory is .... theory. In real life it just doesn't pan out.

That's why the electric tuners have to "bend" the rules to tune. They
have to somehow compensate for the fact that the math just doesn't add
up (at least in this case). A piano tuned "correctly" (meaning to what
music theory says it should be) - sounds very wrong.

It is like writing computer software. It can work great, but try to
get it to interact with the real world and you have a load of
headaches.

Will this equipment also tell the owner that their piano has false
beats? How does it deal with false beats? Do false beats throw out the
signal your getting? How does the software tell the difference between
a false beat and the true beat?

What about loose windings? Loose pins? String rust? Etc., etc., etc.

Unless you are a technician you wouldn't believe all the variables
that can (and will) happen. Will the equipment tell the owner that
things are going wrong, and how to adjust the environment (or
whatever) to prevent it from damaging the instrument?

And after 3 or 4 years of the piano owner thinking the instrument is
fine because the equipment says it's tuning it - what happens when a
piano technician does come and breaks the news that there a lot of
work needed, that could have been seen much sooner before it got
worse?

Mike :)
Parks & Sons Piano
<a href="http://www.parksandsonspiano.com">parksandsonspiano.com</a>
J.B. Wood
2012-02-07 13:22:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Joel
I don't want to rain on a parade, but ...
If you are not listening to the string (posts say it is using
optical/magnetic) it must be using Music Theory. The problem is music
theory is .... theory. In real life it just doesn't pan out.
Hello, and not to rain on "your" parade but the math does pan out for
the most part. Are you a piano tuner or one that is familiar with
tuning technique? The tuner adjusts the partials (overtones) of
intervals (primarily 5ths) in the temperament octave (mid range of the
piano keyboard) to those beat values that are required by equal
temperament (ET) (or some other temperament if desired by the customer).
The beat values used are those calculated exactly for a particular
temperament octave interval.

Where the math prediction is slightly off is that once the correct beats
are obtained for the partials, the fundamental frequency associated with
a note isn't quite at the ET pitch (but it isn't much off). The reason
for this inaccuracy is due to piano string inharmonicity - strings are
thick, stiff, under high tension and can't "freely" vibrate. Put
another way, there isn't quite an integer relationship between the
partials and the fundamental frequency.

Once the temperament octave is set, the other notes are tuned by octaves
(the 2 or 3 strings-per-note unisons are tuned last). As a result the
pitch of a note gets increasingly sharp or flat from the ET value as we
depart up or down from the temperament octave, respectively. This is
called "stretch".

To sum the above up, piano tuning requires adjusting the beating
partials of particular intervals in the midrange on a particular piano
to the value required by the temperament. Piano tuning, unlike some
other musical instruments, is most certainly NOT about setting all 88
notes one at a time to a particular pitch/frequency. And if you try it
that way it won't work.

I don't think Mr. Gilmore's self-tuning piano is intended do replace the
services of a piano tuner; it is intended to extended the need for a
human tuner by slightly tweaking string tension in a controlled manner
to preserve the "stretch". At some point though I think one still has
to put in a call to the tuner. Sincerely,
--
J. B. Wood e-mail: ***@hotmail.com
Michael Joel
2012-02-09 01:05:46 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 08:22:23 -0500, in rec.music.makers.piano you
Post by J.B. Wood
Post by Michael Joel
I don't want to rain on a parade, but ...
If you are not listening to the string (posts say it is using
optical/magnetic) it must be using Music Theory. The problem is music
theory is .... theory. In real life it just doesn't pan out.
Hello, and not to rain on "your" parade but the math does pan out for
the most part. Are you a piano tuner or one that is familiar with
tuning technique? The tuner adjusts the partials (overtones) of
Post by Michael Joel
SNIP......
Actually, I myself am not classified as a tuner (though I have done
some basic work with tuning - and am told I could, but that is a story
that is a divergence)...

My dad started piano servicing in 1965 and my family grew up in the
field. Today my brother and I run a family business, Parks and Sons
Piano Service, we providing tuning, repair, rebuilding,
reconditioning, etc., etc... (tuner/technician services)

If the equipment's short comings are to be evaluated - I would suggest
the services of a tuner/technician not a tuner - there is a huge
difference.

A tuner will only know how to tune (maybe make some slight adjustments
and a very easy repair), while a tuner/technician does it all. They
know what is going on "under the hood".

I don't want to try to force my points (no reason - I think in the end
they will become evident) but the piano is a lot more than just a box
of strings that all need to vibrate to the correct scale. There are a
lot of factors that each play a part in making a string sound the way
it does - and they don't all reside in the string.

The equipment may very well keep a piano close, most of the time,
between tunings. Problem is - those people who want their piano in
tune consistently have the ears to hear the difference between a
machine tuning and a human tuning by ear. Some can hear 1 or 2 cents
difference and to them it is terrible.

The ones that go 3 or 5 years between tunings, I doubt will want to
spend the money on the equipment anyway.

Even a recorded so called "hand tuning" is nothing more than numbers
to the equipment. That recording wasn't even made in the climate the
piano is sitting in - it will have been done at a factory (or
showroom) where (very likely) the climate is not the same - meaning by
the time the piano is in your living room, it is almost a different
instrument (speaking of environmental effects on the wood, felt,
leather, metal, plastics, etc.).

I won't even try to imagine the effects of passing voltage through
strings under tons of pressure (the piano has that cast iron plate for
a good reason), effects on glue, felts. Add the effects of the strings
not being allowed to be left alone. Remember even our modern knowledge
doesn't know everything about electricity - in fact most of our
knowledge is only theory.

What value does it carry for the customer? The tuner isn't going to
lessen the tuning fee by how much the piano is off. Depending on the
system's installation manor, and function I don't know how many tuners
will be willing to work on such a piano. How does the tuner prevent
the machine from changing his tuning to what the equipment *thinks* it
should be? Not to mention the possible noise introduced.


See - I get going on the subject and run on when I should just be
quiet.
It is just (in my opinion at least) incorrect to look at the "problem"
of tuning a piano by looking at the strings and the math. It is like
planning on how to drive from point A to B, and only concentrate on
point B. You may get there but it wont be pretty :)

Thanks for putting up with me lol
Mike

- - - - - - - - - -
Parks and Sons Piano Service
http://www.parksandsonspiano.com
Michael Joel
2012-02-09 14:43:53 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 08:22:23 -0500, "J.B. Wood"
<***@nrl.navy.mil> wrote:

...SNIP...
Post by J.B. Wood
The tuner adjusts the partials (overtones) of
intervals (primarily 5ths) in the temperament octave (mid range of the
piano keyboard) to those beat values that are required by equal
temperament (ET) (or some other temperament if desired by the customer).
The beat values used are those calculated exactly for a particular
temperament octave interval.
If you use theory for your temperament - your ears will not like it
(or at least for most instruments). Then you go on to tune it - just
doesn't pan out.
Post by J.B. Wood
Hello, and not to rain on "your" parade but the math does pan out for
the most part.
"for the most part" - is correct.


But as I said - no need to argue.
Mike
J.B. Wood
2012-02-13 11:52:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Joel
If you use theory for your temperament - your ears will not like it
(or at least for most instruments). Then you go on to tune it - just
doesn't pan out.
Post by J.B. Wood
Hello, and not to rain on "your" parade but the math does pan out for
the most part.
"for the most part" - is correct.
But as I said - no need to argue.
Mike
Hello, and au contraire. You have established a basis to "argue." For
someone who purportedly works for a piano servicing firm you seem
woefully ignorant in how piano tuning takes place. And I think you need
to clarify what you mean by "theory" as applied to temperament. You
make nebulous statements like that while at the same time you don't seem
to understand how an acoustic piano is tuned. I tried to give a brief
description of the process in a previous post. May I suggest reading
the chapter on tuning in Arthur Reblitz's book "Piano Tuning, Servicing
and Rebuilding"?

Now, there are some folks that state they don't like equal temperament
(ET) as a result of the "agitated" 400-cent major thirds that are about
14 cents wider than the just intonation (JI) value of 386 cents (1200 *
log2(5/4)). But this is an issue with JI vs ET and is not tied to any
particular musical instrument. Sincerely,
--
J. B. Wood e-mail: ***@hotmail.com
Michael Joel
2012-02-13 14:15:19 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 06:52:31 -0500, "J.B. Wood"
Post by J.B. Wood
Hello, and au contraire. You have established a basis to "argue." For
someone who purportedly works for a piano servicing firm you seem
woefully ignorant in how piano tuning takes place. And I think you need
to clarify what you mean by "theory" as applied to temperament. You
make nebulous statements like that while at the same time you don't seem
to understand how an acoustic piano is tuned. I tried to give a brief
description of the process in a previous post. May I suggest reading
the chapter on tuning in Arthur Reblitz's book "Piano Tuning, Servicing
and Rebuilding"?
Now, there are some folks that state they don't like equal temperament
(ET) as a result of the "agitated" 400-cent major thirds that are about
14 cents wider than the just intonation (JI) value of 386 cents (1200 *
log2(5/4)). But this is an issue with JI vs ET and is not tied to any
particular musical instrument. Sincerely,
Obviously this discussion will go no where.
I guess I am ignorant - of course you may not simply understand what I
am saying - but I am fine with allowing you to believe I am ignorant.

Mike
Dario Niedermann
2012-02-08 11:35:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Joel
If you are not listening to the string (posts say it is using
optical/magnetic) it must be using Music Theory. The problem is music
theory is .... theory. In real life it just doesn't pan out.
The video clearly shows that the system *is* listening to the strings.
Also, it says that the target frequency values were stored from a
previous hand tuning.
--
Post by Michael Joel
head -n1 /etc/*-{version,release} && uname -mprs
Slackware 12.1.0
Linux 2.6.24.5-smp i686 AMD Turion(tm) 64 Mobile Technology MK-36
Michael Joel
2012-02-09 01:14:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dario Niedermann
Post by Michael Joel
If you are not listening to the string (posts say it is using
optical/magnetic) it must be using Music Theory. The problem is music
theory is .... theory. In real life it just doesn't pan out.
The video clearly shows that the system *is* listening to the strings.
Also, it says that the target frequency values were stored from a
previous hand tuning.
Listening? I believe the OP said it used magnetic/optical pickups.
Now I understand to a computer programmer they will think of it as
"listening" but it is not. To think so means one must completely
believe that all our senses are nothing more than math (or can be
broken down into) - which they most definetly is/can not.

I would think it would just be much simpler to buy a digital. It wont
go out of tune (normally). Of course it will not be worth much in 3
years but there are always prices to pay for convenience.

Quick, Quality, Cheap choose 2.

As I said - I don't want to argue. I think in the end it will all
prove out.

Mike
Michael Joel
2012-02-09 01:47:50 UTC
Permalink
Just wanted to make sure I didn't leave the impression that I endore
digitals. I used that to point out that while convenient and you won't
need a technician - you also won't have any value in it. Not that big
a deal to some. Others like their money to be more of an investment.

This of course even ignores the fact a digital is not a piano but
another subject.
Some customers (professional pianists) once said they visited a school
that claimed to teach piano - said the room was lined with digitals.
They told the teacher - you don't teach piano.

Mike
Jean-David Beyer
2012-02-09 12:22:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Joel
Just wanted to make sure I didn't leave the impression that I endore
digitals. I used that to point out that while convenient and you won't
need a technician - you also won't have any value in it. Not that big
a deal to some. Others like their money to be more of an investment.
This of course even ignores the fact a digital is not a piano but
another subject.
Some customers (professional pianists) once said they visited a school
that claimed to teach piano - said the room was lined with digitals.
They told the teacher - you don't teach piano.
Mike
Trouble is some schools (not Conservatories of music) teach piano and
other musical instruments because parents insist on it, or because
school boards want to. Like they teach computers. Price is EVERYTHING.
And a $700 digital, like my Yamaha P-85 has a keyboard that looks like a
piano keyboard, feels pretty much like a piano keyboard (I have played
crappy real pianos that feel worse). sounds a lot like a piano in most
respects (since the sounds are recorded from a real piano). There is no
cross-coupling or whatever it is called: pressing down a key with all
the dampers off will not cause harmonically related strings to sound
sympathetically. Other deficiencies. Mine sounds poorly in the lower
pitched notes (sounds sharp) because of the tiny internal speakers, but
sounds pretty good when connected to my pretty good stereo system. The
bottom 3 notes are still poor because my stereo does not go down that
far (the speakers only go to about 32 cycles). But I doubt a school
could afford several real pianos that are better than my digital one.

Now a real music school would probably not put up with a P-85 (or
whatever the current version of that is), but for most schools, it would
be difficult for them to justify the higher price of a real piano.

I could not afford a real one, and even if I could, I would have no room
for one.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 07:15:01 up 29 days, 14:41, 3 users, load average: 4.87, 5.23, 5.37
Michael Joel
2012-02-09 15:08:00 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 07:22:30 -0500, Jean-David Beyer
Post by Jean-David Beyer
Trouble is some schools (not Conservatories of music) teach piano and
other musical instruments because parents insist on it, or because
school boards want to. Like they teach computers. Price is EVERYTHING.
And a $700 digital, like my Yamaha P-85 has a keyboard that looks like a
piano keyboard, feels pretty much like a piano keyboard (I have played
crappy real pianos that feel worse). sounds a lot like a piano in most
respects (since the sounds are recorded from a real piano).
...SNIP...
Post by Jean-David Beyer
Now a real music school would probably not put up with a P-85 (or
whatever the current version of that is), but for most schools, it would
be difficult for them to justify the higher price of a real piano.
Actually, when you consider the fact that a $700 price will in 3 years
(maybe that long) will be worth more like $100. Then figure an older
upright could be picked up (many times for free) and then $700 to
$1000 or so put in to fix it up (no it won't rebuild it but it will
get it in good shape) and that this will last years and years with
almost no depreciation (depreciation takes place mostly in the first
few years - so an older piano is not going to have much) - there is an
investment, not just a cost.

One high school up here picked up a number of pianos for free
(donated). 6' 6" (haven't measured it but it is close to that or
slightly larger) Kohler & Campbell grand, a Yamaha grand (smaller),
and a Yamaha upright.

Digitals are recorded off a piano, true, but what is the sample? It is
a part of the note then the digital loops it. No sympathetic resonance
of other strings (not just when the damper is off), or of the case, or
such.

I have a feeling those pianos you say felt worse than your digital
were in desperate need of regulation. Once regulated I doubt you would
have felt they were so terrible.

If you don't like something about a digital - you most likely are
stuck with it. A piano can be changed to adjust to the player.

Then you have the "but I save because I don't have a tuner come out
and tune it every year" type of stuff. Do you save? One person called
us - they had sold their piano and had a digital (you know the ones
with the shrunk fake piano case) - problem is, it was messing up and a
note (somewhere near middle C) would "BOoooong" off when they got near
it. We don't do digital work, but they said the person that did come
out didn't fix it but did cost hundreds of dollars. They now wish to
find a piano to replace the digital. If it had been a piano (with some
simular problem) we probably could have fixed it free while tuning it.

Thanks for taking the time to read it,
Mike
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Parks &amp; Sons Piano
http://www.parksandsonspiano.com
Jean-David Beyer
2012-02-11 15:04:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Joel
On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 07:22:30 -0500, Jean-David Beyer
Post by Jean-David Beyer
Trouble is some schools (not Conservatories of music) teach piano and
other musical instruments because parents insist on it, or because
school boards want to. Like they teach computers. Price is EVERYTHING.
And a $700 digital, like my Yamaha P-85 has a keyboard that looks like a
piano keyboard, feels pretty much like a piano keyboard (I have played
crappy real pianos that feel worse). sounds a lot like a piano in most
respects (since the sounds are recorded from a real piano).
...SNIP...
Post by Jean-David Beyer
Now a real music school would probably not put up with a P-85 (or
whatever the current version of that is), but for most schools, it would
be difficult for them to justify the higher price of a real piano.
Actually, when you consider the fact that a $700 price will in 3 years
(maybe that long) will be worth more like $100. Then figure an older
upright could be picked up (many times for free) and then $700 to
$1000 or so put in to fix it up (no it won't rebuild it but it will
get it in good shape) and that this will last years and years with
almost no depreciation (depreciation takes place mostly in the first
few years - so an older piano is not going to have much) - there is an
investment, not just a cost.
I started learning to play piano at a local "conservatory" near me. It
had two spinit pianos of dubious ancestry. They probably got them for
free. My P-85 feels more like a real piano than those two do. It feels
pretty much like the one my piano teacher has. One of these.

http://bluthnerpiano.com/bspecs.html

Now her piano is better than my P-85 in every way. But it does give me
a standard by which I can judge the ones I usually come in contact with.

My Quaker meeting got a free upright piano. It was hopeless. One of our
members rebuilt the thing; fixed broken mechanism, re-did the felt on
the hammers, etc. He could not really get it properly tuned, not because
he did not know how, but because the tuning pegs were just too loose to
hold the tension. Tuning it flat helped a tiny bit, but that just would
not do. I doubt there is any point to trying to restore that one. It
would not make sense anyway, because the building has no air
conditioning, and we heat it to 43F when the building is unoccupied, and
to 65F when there are people there. I doubt a real piano could put up
with that for very long.
Post by Michael Joel
One high school up here picked up a number of pianos for free
(donated). 6' 6" (haven't measured it but it is close to that or
slightly larger) Kohler & Campbell grand, a Yamaha grand (smaller),
and a Yamaha upright.
Digitals are recorded off a piano, true, but what is the sample? It is
a part of the note then the digital loops it. No sympathetic resonance
of other strings (not just when the damper is off), or of the case, or
such.
I am not sure about there being a digital loop. They recorded each note
at 4 different loudnesses, and notice how fast the key goes down and
they use that to decide which loudness, or combination of adjacent
loudnesses to use to make the sound. I believe the better Yamaha digital
pianos do a better job and may even do some sympathetic resonances. But
those are $3000 and up, not $700. They also make real pianos that are
even more.
Post by Michael Joel
I have a feeling those pianos you say felt worse than your digital
were in desperate need of regulation. Once regulated I doubt you would
have felt they were so terrible.
I becha you could not have made those pianos work well. Certainly not
the one in the Quaker meeting house.
Post by Michael Joel
If you don't like something about a digital - you most likely are
stuck with it. A piano can be changed to adjust to the player.
Then you have the "but I save because I don't have a tuner come out
and tune it every year" type of stuff. Do you save? One person called
us - they had sold their piano and had a digital (you know the ones
with the shrunk fake piano case) - problem is, it was messing up and a
note (somewhere near middle C) would "BOoooong" off when they got near
it. We don't do digital work, but they said the person that did come
out didn't fix it but did cost hundreds of dollars. They now wish to
find a piano to replace the digital. If it had been a piano (with some
simular problem) we probably could have fixed it free while tuning it.
Thanks for taking the time to read it,
Mike
I certainly do not claim that a digital piano is superior to a real one,
except in a couple of ways. It is certainly inferior musically. For me,
a student, it is better because it fits in my living room, where a real
piano, even a 6' one would not. Tuning it would not be a big problem. I
used to tune my clavichord, which I admit is much easier than a piano
(only one string per note, and only 54 of them). On the other hand, it
needed tuning quite often. I would not presume to tune a real piano
myself, though most recently, I tuned two notes on my 37-note toy piano.
That takes only a good ear and a Dremel tool with a small grinding
wheel. ;-) (I am not kidding.) If you are a professional piano tuner, I
doubt you would like a toy piano -- they are never tuned just right, and
their harmonic development is rather different from a real piano. Here
is a friend of mine playing a toy piano. She is a much better pianist
than I will ever be.


--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 09:35:01 up 1 day, 12:31, 3 users, load average: 5.26, 5.15, 5.07
Michael Joel
2012-02-13 14:37:09 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 10:04:45 -0500, Jean-David Beyer
Post by Jean-David Beyer
I started learning to play piano at a local "conservatory" near me. It
had two spinit pianos of dubious ancestry. They probably got them for
free. My P-85 feels more like a real piano than those two do. It feels
pretty much like the one my piano teacher has. One of these.
http://bluthnerpiano.com/bspecs.html
Now her piano is better than my P-85 in every way. But it does give me
a standard by which I can judge the ones I usually come in contact with.
Very true. An excellent instrument - but that would be out of most
people's price range.
Post by Jean-David Beyer
My Quaker meeting got a free upright piano. It was hopeless. One of our
members rebuilt the thing; fixed broken mechanism, re-did the felt on
the hammers, etc. He could not really get it properly tuned, not because
he did not know how, but because the tuning pegs were just too loose to
hold the tension. Tuning it flat helped a tiny bit, but that just would
not do. I doubt there is any point to trying to restore that one. It
would not make sense anyway, because the building has no air
conditioning, and we heat it to 43F when the building is unoccupied, and
to 65F when there are people there. I doubt a real piano could put up
with that for very long.
Steady temps are obviously a good thing - humidity as well.
Sounds like the pinblock *may* be shot. A technician could tell you if
it would benifit from "doping" and driving the pins. Another option
would be a set of tuning pins the next size up. Obviously the next
size up tuning pins will be costly - but you say this person is
handling it so he may try doping the block and driving them or the
pins -he has already put a good bit of work in.
Post by Jean-David Beyer
I am not sure about there being a digital loop. They recorded each note
at 4 different loudnesses, and notice how fast the key goes down and
they use that to decide which loudness, or combination of adjacent
loudnesses to use to make the sound. I believe the better Yamaha digital
pianos do a better job and may even do some sympathetic resonances. But
those are $3000 and up, not $700. They also make real pianos that are
even more.
Maybe things have changed - I don't keep up with the digitals very
much. But usually a sample of the note is taken. Then when you hit the
key this sample is played - if the key is held down the sample loops
(I believe - if I remember right - in the older digitals you could
hear it if you listen closely). The note volume is simple - volume up
- volume down. I am sure the more expensive digitals would have longer
samples and multi-sampling. Wood keys - with simulated actions. Of
course you can go into the hybrid.
Post by Jean-David Beyer
I becha you could not have made those pianos work well. Certainly not
the one in the Quaker meeting house.
You might be surprised what a good technician can do - but then a good
technician would verly likely tell you that particulary instrument's
final vaslue would not be worht the cost of the fixes. It's not a
Steinway is it :D ;)
Post by Jean-David Beyer
I certainly do not claim that a digital piano is superior to a real one,
except in a couple of ways. It is certainly inferior musically. For me,
a student, it is better because it fits in my living room, where a real
piano, even a 6' one would not.
Unless your digital is put away after use - you have room for an
upright don't you? You may be surprised the sound you can get from an
upright (50 so inches).


Mike Parks

Parks & Sons Piano
http://www.parksandsonspiano.com
Dario Niedermann
2012-02-23 10:40:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Joel
Digitals are recorded off a piano, true, but what is the sample? It is
a part of the note then the digital loops it.
Not in any reasonably recent digital piano from reputable makers.

I don't know exactly when they stopped using loops, but it's been years.
First only on the pricier models, now even on the cheap ones, as memory
has become more and more affordable.
Michael Joel
2012-02-24 21:59:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dario Niedermann
Post by Michael Joel
Digitals are recorded off a piano, true, but what is the sample? It is
a part of the note then the digital loops it.
Not in any reasonably recent digital piano from reputable makers.
I don't know exactly when they stopped using loops, but it's been years.
First only on the pricier models, now even on the cheap ones, as memory
has become more and more affordable.
Last time I read about digitals was fall 2009 (piano buyer). They were
still looping samples. So maybe things have changed in 2 years (1 - fall
2010, 2 - fall of 2011 ... haven't gotten to spring of 2012 yet).

I am not contradicting you - I couldn't since like I said, I haven't
read about it in 2 years. It just seems odd to me looping would be
dropped since it serves an important use in digitals.

Memory is cheap but not the time and recording setups to get samples.
Besides what if you want a note to last longer than a sample was taken?
The answer to that would be loop it, since synth. would not sound right.

Guess I better take some time to re-read up on the latest info :)
Mike
Dario Niedermann
2012-02-27 04:18:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Joel
Last time I read about digitals was fall 2009 (piano buyer). They were
still looping samples.
Will you please cite any models from reputable makers that were using
loops in 2009?
Post by Michael Joel
Besides what if you want a note to last longer than a sample was taken?
What if you want a note to last longer than your acoustic piano sustains
it?
Michael Joel
2012-02-27 05:17:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dario Niedermann
Will you please cite any models from reputable makers that were using
loops in 2009?
First let me say the 2009 issue of Piano Buyer did not have a chart
saying which digitals used looping and which did not. So I can't say,
this one, that one. But here is what it did say on the subject...


..."Looping involves selecting a short duration of the sound that
remains essentially unchanged over a period of time, and repeating it
over and over at gradually reduced volume levels. Done with care, the
result is barely detectable when listening intently to the sustain of
one note, and becomes completely lost in the commotion when playing
normally."...

I think it is reasonable to take from that it is being used - otherwise
why discuss it when the topic is how the digital pianos reproduce tone.

The rest is other points on the digital recording systems and are not
specific to looping - but interesting.
If you see (**A COMMENT**) that is me and not original.

(pg. 110)
..."how many notes to sample. The obvious answer would seem to be "all
of them," and some manufacturers take this route. But in the interest of
keeping the cost of the digital piano under control, many manufacturers
seek alternatives to sampling all 88 notes"...

..."But the tonal changes from one note to the next are not always
noticeable; sometimes, all that changes is the pitch (**Opinion**). It
turns out that it's a fairly simple matter for the digital piano to play
back a sample at a different pitch. This makes it possible to save
memory space by using one sample as the basis for two or three
consecutive notes. Taken too far, this would result in obvious tonal
problems. But if at least a third of the notes are sampled, with careful
attention to areas of the keyboard where there are more noticeable
changes, these shared samples can produce a convincing (**Opinion - to
some it is not**), if basic, tonal progression."...


..."Striking a string harder results in a larger number and greater
prominence of higher overtones, which, in addition to making the sound
louder, give the tone more "edge." Currently, in all but the least
expensive instruments, digital pianos use from three to five dynamic
samples. As you play with varying degrees of force, the digital piano
selects the closest appropriate (**NOTE it selects the closest**)
dynamic sample for playback. Entry-level pianos that use a single sample
level for dynamics also use variable filtering of a note's overtones to
simulate these tonal differences, sometimes with remarkable success."...
Post by Dario Niedermann
What if you want a note to last longer than your acoustic piano sustains
it?
A loop can repeat as long as the computer tells it to. Then can fade by
volume decay (along with any other effects the manufacturer includes).

Now I don't agree with the author. I read his second edition book (from
1980s) and in my opinion (which is not worth a lot) he has changed his
stance on a number of points that would not allow me to view him as
un-bias in the regards of piano quality, etc.. I only add that so no one
thinks I somehow go along with his views.

Finally - it mentioned on pg. 255 that Roland was going to produce the
V-Piano which used no sampling at all and only synthesized the sound.
--
Michael Joel
Loading...