Hi Karvala,

Interesting point, but i'm not sure I understand something if you don't mind clarifying:

My understanding of how the piano was sampled is that multiple mics are placed in the room with fixed settings(preamp gain, etc).

Considering only a single pedal/etc condition layer, the robot plays a key at multiple velocities and the microphones capture the resulting sound.

Unless VSL is changing the mic settings for velocity(perhaps to accomodate dynamic range?) or post-adjusting the amplitude of the samples during playback, it seems to me the amplitude and timbre are linked at the recording point and if the microphones are linear, should represent what the instrument sounds like.

If these two are truly linked at sampling time, then it seems the midi->velocity map should allow to adjust for the problem, which in my view is that for a relatively soft keypress velocity the resulting sound is more ff or even sfz.

I'm probably missing something....

Thanks. 

@William said:

Steven, yes actually I realized I had heard something of yours after writing that. Excellent work though I'm sure you don't care what I think.  

Just having a little fun, and never missing an opportunity for a little shameless self promotion 😉 But thank you very much! 😃

Eukalyptis wrote:

If the Steinway simply had the playability / velocity reaction of the Pianoteq 6 Steinway, in my opinion, the search for pianos would be over! Really hoping for a fix soon.

+1

Dear VSL team, please fix this.

@opus64 said:

Hi Karvala,

Interesting point, but i'm not sure I understand something if you don't mind clarifying:

My understanding of how the piano was sampled is that multiple mics are placed in the room with fixed settings(preamp gain, etc).

Considering only a single pedal/etc condition layer, the robot plays a key at multiple velocities and the microphones capture the resulting sound.

Unless VSL is changing the mic settings for velocity(perhaps to accomodate dynamic range?) or post-adjusting the amplitude of the samples during playback, it seems to me the amplitude and timbre are linked at the recording point and if the microphones are linear, should represent what the instrument sounds like.

If these two are truly linked at sampling time, then it seems the midi->velocity map should allow to adjust for the problem, which in my view is that for a relatively soft keypress velocity the resulting sound is more ff or even sfz.

I'm probably missing something....

Thanks. 

That's a fair question.  If there were no post-processing, you would be absolutely right, but in practice there is a *lot* of processing of the samples after recording, and amplitude adjustment is certainly one of them.

Have you ever heard the Salamander piano - a Yamaha C5 VST?  It was essentially a fun project that someone did on their own, and it's probably the closest you'll come to a piano VST which has simply been sampled and  assembled with minimal post-processing (but even in that, they did some).  It's worth having a listen if you haven't , and you'll see just how raw and 'recorded' the sound is, and it will give you some idea of the amount of work which is needed after recording to turn it into a usable VST rather than a series of triggered individual piano recordings.  Indeed, one might even say that the quality of the post-processing is as important as the recording setup in determining the final quality of the VST.

Stephen, you should always be shameless in self-promotion - a musician has to be.  Also you're playing in real-time - fantastic. 

@William said:

Somehow I never hear any music by them.

Allow me to flex. 😛

If the suggestions in this were implemented, I would say they would have the following direct musical benefits:

• Better "out of the box" sound requiring less EQ to fix the noise.
• Better playability requiring fewer adjustments to the MIDI after a performance.
• For film scoring, piano parts tend to air on the soft side (the opposite of the current curve)... could be more inspirational for composers!

Granted, this is what *I* would do.  If none of these are implemented, then I certainly have workarounds and handy "save presets" options once I get it dialed in how I like it. 😃  I have a feeling though VSL will introduce a curve... they're really good about listening to their customers when they have reasonable requests.

Fantastic stuff, Stephen!!  Dazzling performance of the Rachmaninoff, and your Millennial Suite is superb and with such passionate performance.  Deeply impressive.

@karvala said:

... Indeed, one might even say that the quality of the post-processing is as important as the recording setup in determining the final quality of the VST.

I learn somthing almost every time you post. Thank you for your contribution. 

God Bless,

David

Thanks Karvala, this is a very interesting discussion.

I understand there is normally a lot of processing involved with most sampled pianos which have relatively few actual samples.  For example, the on-board Kawai NV10 engine I bet has a lot of processing going on to make use of the relatively few layers(mixing, splicing, looping, etc) and even with all the trickery one can clearly hear the limited velocity expression when playing it.  (Not to knock this piano, it's not bad compared to the competition)

However, with such a thoroughly sampled piano as the VSL Steinway D(I believe they quote 4000 samples per key!), my expectation is that if I select a single mic perspective and happen to exactly request an isolated key in a velocity/configuration that was sampled then pretty much the original sample would be played.  I'm not sure why it would need to be dramatically altered if I happen to ask for a sound that was sampled exactly.

I can undersand some EQ'ing to compensate for the microphone response, and layering of release samples and of resonance modelling/pedal noise but otherwise I would hope that what I hear is almost exactly what the selected microphone heard in the room...

Anyway this is sort of educated specilation.  I don't really know how VSL does it so interesting discussion!

And another datapoint, I just tested the VSL CFX for the first time, also does not suffer from the problem.  Definitely specific to the VSL Steinway D.

Hello everybody!

We have just released a Library Update for the Steinway D, with improved velocity mapping. 

So far, we have received great feedback from our testers, so this one should be quite a big step into the right direction 😊

Thanks for your input, everbody!!

Best, 
Paul

Apologies for the late reply.  I find this update does dramatically improve the playability at least on my Kawai NV10 in the 'Normal' response mode, while still mantianing some 'lightness' compared to the CFX and Bosendorfer libraries.

It really speaks volumes that you responded so quickly to provide an update, thank you very much.  A lot of companies could learn from this.

I recommend adding a velocity curve editor to these products sometime in the future.  It is physically impossible to have a single parameter account for the wild-west of MIDI controllers out there, all with different mechanical actions. These are simply the best sampled pianos ever, and having the flexibility to tune the velocity curve to the specific action of the controller will let us get the most out of them.

Thanks again.

Since this thread might be read by people waiting for the issues discussed here to be resolved, I just want to add my endorsement of the new update. No need to wait any longer! The VSL Steinway is the best virtual piano I have found. I am impressed that VSL responded so quickly and so thoroughly. Thanks, Paul!

The new update is great. I do agree though, a velocity curve editor would be the best addition to Synchron Pianos, & Vienna Imperial Player, that I can currently think of.

Yes, a velocity editor in the stand-alone player would be useful for many. I play the VSL Steinway in FL Studio, which has a nice velocity editor built in. This DAW also has a nice "piano roll" for recording, which I find useful to check my speed and my accuracy of note time values, for example to be sure eighth notes take half the time of quarter notes, etc. and to stay on tempo.

@NormTheExpert said:

From my experimentation, lowing the dymamics to about 77% provides the timbre variation i would expect, based on my own Steinway at home. It was the first thing I noticed about the Synchron Steinway. Interestingly, this doesn't seem to be a problem with the Bosendorfer Imperial. I use a Roland A80 keyboard, and setting midi sensitivity on the synchron player down 10 works well.

Just a 2010 Steinway Model A (sadly). 

We went to Steinway Hall (London) and they set out 6 instruments for us.  The one we chose was the clear winner in terms of its most beautiful resonant sound.

In our home (with wooden floor boards and a nice cavity underneath), it sounds beautiful - really bright when played FFF and a gorgeous sound when played ppp.

The only downside is that it has taken about 5 years for the tuning to settle (it went all over the place - even when the tuner was tuning it).

I've already reported a general issue with all the Synchron pianos (or it's a plugin issue) - the key noise control doesn't work.  It has been confirmed that this is a bug.  Looking forwards to this being fixed.