KVR Audio

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:01 am

Shane, let me know if you have further questions about my long post above. I'll try my best to help within the 14 days(I think three are gone now?). You can PM me if you wish to discuss issues in more detail, or whatever you want to do.

Brent

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:02 am

shane1980 wrote:
koolkeys wrote:I noticed another little issue. When turning the velocity floor all the way down, and then hitting notes at the lowest velocities, there is a slapback effect, almost like two different notes/samples are being triggered.

Can anyone else confirm this?

Brent
Hi Brent
i confirm this issue exists

Cool, just making sure it wasn't just me.

Brent

jobromedia · Post by **jobromedia** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:33 am

I was excited until I saw the GUI. Then I got a thorn of disbelief growing in me. Then when I heard the first demo mp3 then my disbelief was confirmed. Notes dropping out. Repetitive samples are being heard. And frankly the cpu speaks for itself. At 3% it's more likely to be a sampler than a physical modeled piano. If it was made with synthedit we could expect about 30% cpu usage if the plugin was a physic modelled piano. It is quite simple to see if the plugin is a sampler. Does it comes with a file ending .cki? If it does then they're using Chris Kerry's synthedit modules pack 9 and 10 which clearly is for sampling. I'm not gonna demo this plugin simply because I got the pianos I need, and certainly won't fork out €199 for this piano. It is good sounding, but at the same time MDA Piano would make a sound that is much better, and free.

shane1980 · Post by **shane1980** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:44 am

Hi Brent,
Thank you for your 1500 words report. I really appreciate it.
For Sound Thin, when I tweak the piano, I want the high-end to be thinner,
For controls. SUpreme Pianos have over 40 control units. We hide most of them for our design philosophy is let our user just load the piano, without moving any controls and get the sound. We are very afraid of professional setting and controls frightened common users. So we still the control units is too much on current supreme pianos and planning to reducr more in the future.

For other issue, I will take a look. Thank you Brent

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 3:57 am

I think exposing the controls would add to the value. Just put them on the advanced screen and leave the main screen as it is. Then, people who just want to load and play can do so, and if you want to tweak, you can.

It's about value. I don't doubt that the controls are there. Set them free!

Brent

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 4:01 am

jobromedia wrote:I was excited until I saw the GUI. Then I got a thorn of disbelief growing in me. Then when I heard the first demo mp3 then my disbelief was confirmed. Notes dropping out. Repetitive samples are being heard. And frankly the cpu speaks for itself. At 3% it's more likely to be a sampler than a physical modeled piano. If it was made with synthedit we could expect about 30% cpu usage if the plugin was a physic modelled piano. It is quite simple to see if the plugin is a sampler. Does it comes with a file ending .cki? If it does then they're using Chris Kerry's synthedit modules pack 9 and 10 which clearly is for sampling. I'm not gonna demo this plugin simply because I got the pianos I need, and certainly won't fork out €199 for this piano. It is good sounding, but at the same time MDA Piano would make a sound that is much better, and free.

To be fair, I don't think MDA Piano comes close. I doubted based on the demos as well. But playing it at least gave me confidence that it can sound better. As I stated above, it really wasn't bad at all. Just some little issues to get ironed out.

To tell you the truth, I'm not against samples being used if they were in fact used. I think hybrid methods are the way to go forward because you can get the basic tone with samples and use other factors to tweak the sound through modeling.

It's really about the sound, isn't it? Regardless of how you get there, the sound trumps all. And if it keeps CPU usage low and can improve in some of the areas I mentioned, it will be a pretty good piano option, IMO.

Brent

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 4:11 am

koolkeys wrote:It's really about the sound, isn't it? Regardless of how you get there

No it's about both. Yes sound quality is important but the point about physical modelling is it is how you get there that is equally important as being able to control how you get there opens up a world of sound possibilities you just would not get from a sample based instrument.

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 4:41 am

aMUSEd wrote:
koolkeys wrote:It's really about the sound, isn't it? Regardless of how you get there
No it's about both. Yes sound quality is important but the point about physical modelling is it is how you get there that is equally important as being able to control how you get there opens up a world of sound possibilities you just would not get from a sample based instrument.

I agree. But in the end, if the sound is there, does it matter how it got there? I mean, if you use samples as well as physical modeling, but come up with the same sound as using pure modeling, then the method really takes a huge back seat.

Brent

aMUSEd · Post by **aMUSEd** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 4:45 am

koolkeys wrote:
aMUSEd wrote:
koolkeys wrote:It's really about the sound, isn't it? Regardless of how you get there
No it's about both. Yes sound quality is important but the point about physical modelling is it is how you get there that is equally important as being able to control how you get there opens up a world of sound possibilities you just would not get from a sample based instrument.
I agree. But in the end, if the sound is there, does it matter how it got there?

Yes because I want to be able to get there different ways to create different sounds - that's what's so good about Pianoteq. I don't see the point of physical modelling if it's just used to create a preset player with no ability to actually use the physical modelling engine to explore new sounds.

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 4:48 am

Which is why I said it would be great to open up the controls.

I own and love Pianoteq. I agree about why it's great. I'm just saying that if you can get the same sound from two methods, it doesn't matter how you get there. If you can get a better sound with one method, then by all means, use that method.

Brent

marce · Post by **marce** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:10 am

As i said above, it dont sound bad. What bother me a little about this piano is the information about it, and the agressive tone to the "competitors".
I agree that the sound is the goal after all. If it use samples and sounds good, welcome!
But the "Supreme Pianos does not rely on sampling" appear not fit with what you have in the download. There are there three soundfonts and the mentioned modules for sample playing.
So, maybe, you can clarify. For a bussiness starting, and asking €199 for one product, i believe that make things clear is important.
isnt?

Best regards.

presswerk · Post by **presswerk** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 6:27 am

aMUSEd wrote:But why are you still on version 2 when 3 is a free upgrade? Version 3 is just so much better in every respect (the bottom end in particular is much better - so much so I find myself lowering my keyboard to get some really low, woody, thundery, resonant notes)

For some reason, on my system, V2 behaves very well, and 3 is a bit wonky. But mostly because I am in tune with V2... There's something about its imperfections... It's truly my piano...

John-E34 · Post by **John-E34** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 12:47 pm

Judging by the description of this piano, I am not even going to download the demo...

I cannot believe a synthedit product, from a new developer (that slags off the competition), marketed as being 'physically modeled' that now seems to be a sample player, and carrying a price tag higher than TruePianos....

Well, I give up, if anyone buys this, then I guess the old concept remains... there's one born every minute.

IMHO

koolkeys · Post by **koolkeys** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 8:35 pm

You CAN have samples and also be using PM, btw. Just using samples doesn't mean that it's not modeling at all. It would just mean that the samples are used for part of the tone, while modeling is used for the other part. A common approach, and the same one that TruePianos uses.

Whether it actually uses samples or not, I don't know. I haven't really tried to check like some people have.

Brent

stanlea · Post by **stanlea** » Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:48 pm

My opinion (no 1500 words, sorry):
- some interesting points : attacks, articulations
- no so good points : very artificial resonances, mostly on high-med, looks somtimes like a synth

shane : I dont want you to unveil your secrets, but it's hard to understand that it DOES NOT use samples, while THERE ARE obviously samples in the installer. Could you explain more ?

For me it looks like it's not really finished. I wonder if you can improve it, but as it is, I wouldn't buy it, even for $50. Sorry, but sincere.

Physically Modeled Piano