Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Hi to all,
new little demos are avaible on the physis piano site..

http://www.physispiano.com/physis_eng.htm

what do you think about?? any comment it's really appreciated..

Thanks for your attention,

keyrunner

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Does sound interesting! I will def. wait for a demo in my local music store.
would love to hear an attack like this from PTQ's V4!

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

keyrunner wrote:

Hi to all,
new little demos are avaible on the physis piano site..

http://www.physispiano.com/physis_eng.htm

what do you think about?? any comment it's really appreciated..

Thanks for your attention,

keyrunner

i miss something cause there is no démo ... ???

Last edited by imyself (28-03-2012 15:56)

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Right-click->Save target as...

Last edited by EvilDragon (28-03-2012 15:58)
Hard work and guts!

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

EvilDragon wrote:

Right-click->Save target as...

oops!!!
thank you EvilDragon

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

tractor_music wrote:

I find it hard to accept that;
1) "organs pipes are simple, but there are a lot of them",
2) "piano strings are complex, although there are fewer of them"
3) Therefore sampling will probably work better for pipes and modelling should work better for struck strings.

1. I don't find this hard to accept at all. How hard is it to blow air through a pipe and record it? There's not much variance in that, since there's only so many levels of airflow the pipe organ uses, but I imagine it's rather difficult to accurately model the fluid dynamics involved in that airflow. Also, the pipes aren't connected to each other in ways that are acoustically significant. In fact, I bet organ designers go to great lengths to make sure the pipes don't interact with each other.

2. This statement is true, because these strings are bolted together via the pinblock and soundboard. The entire instrument vibrates and resonates, so the interactions between each string is mind-boggling. You're not playing just one string (or two or three) when you play a piano note. You're playing them all.

3. Therefore, sampling is better for pipes because it's not a big deal to just mix samples together, because the pipes are acoustically independent, but with pianos, simply playing a series of recorded notes cannot capture any of the complex interactions between the strings and piano components. Modeling is the only way to accomplish this. (Yes, some sample libraries are hacking these some of these effects, like harp resonance, but it's an aesthetic after effect, not an integral part of the system.)

The simple truth that I assert is that playing two notes on the piano is not the same as playing each note separately and playing back the recordings. The opposite is true for pipe organs.

That was a fun rabbit to chase. :-) Back to your regularly scheduled forum topic...

Last edited by JerryKnight (28-03-2012 22:14)

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

keyrunner wrote:

Hi to all,
new little demos are avaible on the physis piano site..

http://www.physispiano.com/physis_eng.htm

what do you think about?? any comment it's really appreciated..

Thanks for your attention,

keyrunner

humm! something wrong in this piano sound... it seem: too straight, and cold

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

It does sound glassy on those demos, yeah...

Hard work and guts!

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Judding for these demos, honestly I don't like the trebble. It sounds too thin many times.
The bass sounds solid. Middle range have some few problems too.

Demo 2 and 3 show cleary the weakness...



Curiosity...  The Roland V-Piano grand sounds improved, probably due the real wood body:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0-dC7eT...re=related

Last edited by Beto-Music (28-03-2012 19:16)

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

I don't like it either... same wrong sensation as listening to truepianos (to my ears..)
Much better sensations for vpiano but I don't wanna even know how much it cost

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

etto wrote:

I don't like it either... same wrong sensation as listening to truepianos (to my ears..)
Much better sensations for vpiano but I don't wanna even know how much it cost


thomann
    

Roland GP-7 PE V-Piano Grand

EUR    16,888.-

http://www.thomann.de/at/search_dir.htm...k=&bn=

Last edited by azrael4 (29-03-2012 08:36)

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Ok guys, I share in part your judgment, especially on the part of high frequencies and that the sound is a little too "straight". I personally find good the sound in the bass part.

I believe, however, that due to the fact that it is a physical model, is possible via the various parameters to make the sound less rich in high frequencies and a little warmer like in pianoteq we use to do..

For the momet we are listening to a patch made by a single person whose taste could be very far from ours, and what is legitimate ..  I hope to listen to something different soon... also I hope to hear something about the other physical models presents in the machine..

For the price... should be around 3.900/4.000 euro or at list (so they say) and probably subject to discounts by merchant's .. ... ... The price will depend on the model (plastic or wooden keyboard) and the possible accessories (stand type) included ..  (normal or with amplification..)
(I apologize for my bad english..)
thanks for the comments...

keyrunner

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

azrael4 wrote:
etto wrote:

I don't like it either... same wrong sensation as listening to truepianos (to my ears..)
Much better sensations for vpiano but I don't wanna even know how much it cost


thomann
    

Roland GP-7 PE V-Piano Grand

EUR    16,888.-

http://www.thomann.de/at/search_dir.htm...k=&bn=



Or about 6000€ for non-grand version.

Hard work and guts!

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

EvilDragon wrote:
azrael4 wrote:
etto wrote:

I don't like it either... same wrong sensation as listening to truepianos (to my ears..)
Much better sensations for vpiano but I don't wanna even know how much it cost


thomann
    

Roland GP-7 PE V-Piano Grand

EUR    16,888.-

http://www.thomann.de/at/search_dir.htm...k=&bn=




Or about 6000€ for non-grand version.

AAAAAARGHHHHH

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

The point is that the Grand version of V-piano sopunded quite better than the stage version.


etto wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:
azrael4 wrote:

thomann
    

Roland GP-7 PE V-Piano Grand

EUR    16,888.-

http://www.thomann.de/at/search_dir.htm...k=&bn=




Or about 6000€ for non-grand version.

AAAAAARGHHHHH

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Whether or not we agree on pipes and pipes in combination being simpler to model than strings doesn't change the fact that modelling as implemented by Viscount isn't (yet) overwhelming its market segment.

Maybe it is just "THEM" who aren't "doing it right" - whatever that means.
They may not have the best of the very best people on this, I can only guess.
Their "tastes" in demos may just not be sufficiently appealing to their potential customers.
Any number of factors involved in failing to penetrate a market.

OK, I'll give up on that :-D


I am still dithering between replacing some old hardware with an all-in-one solution or going for just a better soft instrument.
Some of this dilemma is integration vs separates.

Has anyone seen any prices on the Physis Piano yet ?
I had assumed that it would be released at the end of the show or right after.

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Beto-Music wrote:

Judding for these demos, honestly I don't like the trebble. It sounds too thin many times.
The bass sounds solid. Middle range have some few problems too.

Demo 2 and 3 show cleary the weakness...


Curiosity...  The Roland V-Piano grand sounds improved, probably due the real wood body:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0-dC7eT...re=related

But doesn't it have adjustable parameters like Pianoteq to correct this?

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Like V-Piano and Pianoteq, they have some parameters to physis piano, but acording reports the parameters do not change such small imperfection.
Pianoiteq and V-piano also can't be "fixed" with such adjusts.

DonSmith wrote:
Beto-Music wrote:

Judding for these demos, honestly I don't like the trebble. It sounds too thin many times.
The bass sounds solid. Middle range have some few problems too.

Demo 2 and 3 show cleary the weakness...


Curiosity...  The Roland V-Piano grand sounds improved, probably due the real wood body:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0-dC7eT...re=related

But doesn't it have adjustable parameters like Pianoteq to correct this?

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Beto-Music wrote:

Like V-Piano and Pianoteq, they have some parameters to physis piano, but acording reports the parameters do not change such small imperfection.
Pianoiteq and V-piano also can't be "fixed" with such adjusts.

DonSmith wrote:
Beto-Music wrote:

Judding for these demos, honestly I don't like the trebble. It sounds too thin many times.
The bass sounds solid. Middle range have some few problems too.

Demo 2 and 3 show cleary the weakness...


Curiosity...  The Roland V-Piano grand sounds improved, probably due the real wood body:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0-dC7eT...re=related

But doesn't it have adjustable parameters like Pianoteq to correct this?

It isn't clear how adjustable parameters from one compare to those of the others.
There is a fairly long thread in the pianoforum on this, with several contributions from the person that gave the presentation at the show.

I have adopted the recipe analog;  Poor cookies or cake reflect more on the BAKER than on the method, ingredients, tools, etc.

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

The guy who did the demo in the musikmesse video posted over on another forum:

"Yes, the action is made by Fatar, but it's an exclusive design for this piano model. It's based on the graded-hammer WOOD key action of the TP-40, with 3 sensors per note instead of 2.
...
there are 32 'preset' physical models in the Physis piano that include European, American and Asian concert models. Although not written specifically on the piano (probably due to licensing or trademarks?), the preset models reference Steinway, Bosendorfer, Bechstein, Fazioli, Yamaha, Kawai and others. There are also 32 user locations where you can modify and store your own physical model pianos - and even download all parameters through USB memory stick (or share/download them with friends on the user forum!).
...
It's difficult to hear the modifications I made to the piano characteristics in the Youtube video, but much easier to hear live. The ability to change the physical characteristics of the piano to your taste is the biggest advantage of physical modeling technology. I mention in the video that there are 100 different parameters in the Physis piano - but only 15 of these parameters can be modified by the user (the other 85 are used by the engineers). I believe they're considering a software editor that will allow a professional user to modify all of the parameters.
...
The piano will be on the market sometime this Fall, and early reports for pricing have it under the V-Piano from Roland. "

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

With 6 grand piano recreated, I bet it will cost a lot money.

Last edited by Beto-Music (07-04-2012 03:35)

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Beto-Music wrote:

With 6 grand piano recreated, I bet it will cost a lot money.

It is not at all clear to me that this would be "going head to head against" pianoteq.
I think it may be in search of a slightly different market segment.

Not everyone wants to use PCs, not everyone wants to adjust ANY parameters.
Many piano players have been used to acoustic instruments that offer very little "adjustment" between tunings (open/close the lid, move it relative to walls, install humidifier, install dehumidifier, drapes, etc.)

I think I would be content with a very nice Steinway that never goes out of tune, but at this point the closest thing to that is in Ivory II.
I am not all that enthusiastic about desks with keyboards, laptops and cables snaking around all over the place.
The integrated instrument has some appeal. 
Set it, forget it.
Get back to PLAYING, etc.

Last edited by tractor_music (07-04-2012 13:45)

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Well, I understand you.  I never like any PC I had, cause all had a lot of problems, cause PC basis of PC language it's a crap, created to generate problems.  Sometimes I would like to have TNT jut to explode my PC.   Join this the cables, configuration problems, soundboard compability, trying to find the best LATENCY,  and you get a headache.

But I also don't like the idea of a expensive digital  piano,  that will be outdate in few years, and can't be updated.

For me all digital things have a negative side and great headache potencial.  First of all, all TV adds show a lie, cause in a TV comercial everthing works fine, but when you buy a digital product, the things are slow or buging.

I still use a CRT monitor, cause I just hate all LCD monitors, a lie from industry pushed to consumers. I just don't understand how people accept a distorted image.

tractor_music wrote:
Beto-Music wrote:

With 6 grand piano recreated, I bet it will cost a lot money.

It is not at all clear to me that this would be "going head to head against" pianoteq.
I think it may be in search of a slightly different market segment.

Not everyone wants to use PCs, not everyone wants to adjust ANY parameters.
Many piano players have been used to acoustic instruments that offer very little "adjustment" between tunings (open/close the lid, move it relative to walls, install humidifier, install dehumidifier, drapes, etc.)

I think I would be content with a very nice Steinway that never goes out of tune, but at this point the closest thing to that is in Ivory II.
I am not all that enthusiastic about desks with keyboards, laptops and cables snaking around all over the place.
The integrated instrument has some appeal. 
Set it, forget it.
Get back to PLAYING, etc.

Last edited by Beto-Music (07-04-2012 18:52)

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

That's tough... I've never had a lot of problems with my PCs...

Hard work and guts!

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Id like to add to the discussion which, a bit off topic, dealing with sampling or modelling organs/pianos.

ORGANS AND HARPSICHORDS
Organs and harpsichords are, in my view very suitable for sampling. Because they dont have dynamic variance a layering of say 8 samples per note and another 4-8 of release samples make a suitable recording. In fact a sampled organ or harpsichord is what I prefer over modelling.

I love that pianoteq includes two harpsichords and I really hope for more historical instruments like more harpsichords or perhaps a clavichord ! But for the time being, I use a sampled harpsichord whenever I want to explore the art of the fugue.

PIANO
Talking about piano is a totally different story in the light of pianoteq. The sampled pianos a couple of years ago with say 4-8 layers of samples per note just didnt sound or feel right. So they added more samples, and more, and more. Until you would end up with a ridiculousy big sample library of just one single piano. And of course, even with a huge library, the sympathetic resonance was missing.

In my mind, moddart has done something extrordinary creating pianoteq. I keep and old Danemann upright from 1920 which I tune and maintain myself and love and cherish and soforth. But playing on my roland fp5 with pianoteq is something exquisit and extraordinary, I prefer it over any sample library and also over real pianos and grands, because Ive get to adjust the touch, and feel, and sound to my exact preference.

WIND INSTRUMENTS
Want to add something further to the debate about sampling vs modelling.
Talking about any windinstrument - I believe the best way to go is samples. Given that the tone is even more complex in a windinstrument then in a piano, to create a modelling of it would be strange. How to modell the small variances of airflow in a human way ?

Summing up my post:

Harpsichords and organs - sample them!

Piano - pianoteq !!!

Any windinstrument -  sample it !

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Actually Yamaha VL-1 did a pretty darn awesome job of modelling wind instruments. I don't think sampling is the way to go for wind instruments, because it's just too many different articulations happening, harmonics, overblowing and whatnot. All those variances are much more convenient for modelling.

Hard work and guts!

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Please don't tell me you love LCD computer monitor technology ...

I can't understand how so many people ignore the angle view problem, and the fact that if you move the head just a inch, the contrast and brightness look different a bit.  In other words, the distant between the right to left eye it's enough to change the contrast/brightness a bit. So what the right eye see it's not the same contrast/brighness the left eye see.

I'm alergic to LCD monitor, I just can't stand in front one, cause it make frustrated and made fool by marketing lie campagne.

People eat this thing just because most have a retangular screen and slim design.

One day I will put a LCD inside a CRT monitor body, just to people see how silly LCD is.

For me LCD it's like a digital piano with just 2 layers per note, no re-pedaling, no halph pedal, no pedal ressonance, no simpathetic ressonance... and crap speakers.


EvilDragon wrote:

That's tough... I've never had a lot of problems with my PCs...

Last edited by Beto-Music (08-04-2012 22:26)

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

I love my LCD, yes. LCDs have improved with time, and the technology is still advancing. I love how compact they are. I don't do graphics, so color precision is not of the utmost importance to me. They work well, they consume a lot less electricity, and are cheaper than CRTs. What's not to love?

The angle view problem? Well in 99.9% of cases you're looking STRAIGHT at the monitor, and not from the sides. Come on, man! That, and for quite a while higher tier LCDs have 175° viewing angle or something like that...

For me, an LCD is a portable companion which doesn't punish your spine when you want to move it. And I think you're overreacting to the whole thing just a little bit. Millions use them without any issues...


But what does this have to do with this topic?

Last edited by EvilDragon (09-04-2012 00:31)
Hard work and guts!

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

The angle view, for me, do not need to get to the point of generate negative image areas to be considered a crap from hell.
Just a small change in head position, as little 50% of a inch, already create some distortion in shadow areas, like the pianoteq image layout on the top of this page.  And the simple distance from the right eye to the left eye are enough to create some diferent contrast/brigtness, so one eye see a image contrast and the other eye say another.

I really hate LCD, even the modern ones, the LED iluminated one, all models.  I just can't accept that something called modern be worde than a old CRT.

I tried to use one once and I just could not stand in front of that thing. That thing make me sick.

EvilDragon wrote:

I love my LCD, yes. LCDs have improved with time, and the technology is still advancing. I love how compact they are. I don't do graphics, so color precision is not of the utmost importance to me. They work well, they consume a lot less electricity, and are cheaper than CRTs. What's not to love?

The angle view problem? Well in 99.9% of cases you're looking STRAIGHT at the monitor, and not from the sides. Come on, man! That, and for quite a while higher tier LCDs have 175° viewing angle or something like that...

For me, an LCD is a portable companion which doesn't punish your spine when you want to move it. And I think you're overreacting to the whole thing just a little bit. Millions use them without any issues...


But what does this have to do with this topic?

Last edited by Beto-Music (09-04-2012 05:13)

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

I must say that I have no idea what you're talking about. I have perfect eyesight, and I see absolutely NO differences between my right and left eye in contrast and brightness, when looking from the same point at my LCD.


Must be I'm mad, right?


Get used to it, as the world is not going back to CRTs.


Beto-Music wrote:

The angle view, for me, do not need to get to the point of generate negative image areas to be considered a crap from hell.
Just a small change in head position, as little 50% of a inch, already create some distortion in shadow areas, like the pianoteq image layout on the top of this page.  And the simple distance from the right eye to the left eye are enough to create some diferent contrast/brigtness, so one eye see a image contrast and the other eye say another.

I really hate LCD, even the modern ones, the LED iluminated one, all models.  I just can't accept that something called modern be worde than a old CRT.

I tried to use one once and I just could not stand in front of that thing. That thing make me sick.

Last edited by EvilDragon (09-04-2012 07:29)
Hard work and guts!

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

EvilDragon wrote:

I must say that I have no idea what you're talking about. I have perfect eyesight, and I see absolutely NO differences between my right and left eye in contrast and brightness, when looking from the same point at my LCD.

Must be I'm mad, right?

Get used to it, as the world is not going back to CRTs.

+10000000

and by the way... What do you think about the erratic behavior of male beetles of New Guinea between May 12 and September 23 at 6:04 p.m. ???

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

All LCDs I saw had few distortions. 

Take a image with some degradee, and move you head horizontally about a inch or two. The degradee will change a bit.  This distance from right to left eye it's more than 2 inchs.

Also if you change the angle of your head vertically, the contrast will change.

I challenge any human being of Earth to show me a LCD monitor than I like or approve.

Come on... put a good CRT by side of a LCD, displaying the same imagem, and you will see LCD it's not good.

I will keep using CRT, and even fixing technical defects on it it happen, as long as I can. I refuse to use a LCD as monitor. I refuse this worldwide lie from media.

For me it's impossible to accept this technology.  How can I use such garbage, if for example I need to contrast grading a image, but don't know what image it's true, the image 2 inchs to side or two inchs from another, or 2 inchs upper or dow ?????



EvilDragon wrote:

I must say that I have no idea what you're talking about. I have perfect eyesight, and I see absolutely NO differences between my right and left eye in contrast and brightness, when looking from the same point at my LCD.


Must be I'm mad, right?


Get used to it, as the world is not going back to CRTs.


Beto-Music wrote:

The angle view, for me, do not need to get to the point of generate negative image areas to be considered a crap from hell.
Just a small change in head position, as little 50% of a inch, already create some distortion in shadow areas, like the pianoteq image layout on the top of this page.  And the simple distance from the right eye to the left eye are enough to create some diferent contrast/brigtness, so one eye see a image contrast and the other eye say another.

I really hate LCD, even the modern ones, the LED iluminated one, all models.  I just can't accept that something called modern be worde than a old CRT.

I tried to use one once and I just could not stand in front of that thing. That thing make me sick.

Last edited by Beto-Music (10-04-2012 01:30)

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

It's not a "lie from media". It's a choice and convenience.

Hard work and guts!

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

It's a lie cause thay never said this is worse than CRT but just keeping saying that had improvements for color etc.
Why everyone stay in silence, not comment about the the inferior color and contrast gamma ???

Sometime I feel like was in the film The Body Snatchers...   the final scene when guy look to another and all people was in possession of aliens, making funny faces and noise.
Háaa háaa háaaaaaaa...
:-)

http://nukethefridge.com/wp-content/upl.../16539.jpg


EvilDragon wrote:

It's not a "lie from media". It's a choice and convenience.

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

That's called marketing. However, you always have a choice to choose what you want. In my case, I don't need no stinky CRTs taking over half of my table.


Can we please move on to the actual topic?

Hard work and guts!

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

Yesterday I emailed Viscount for more info about the US market and they replied that Physis should be available here "towards the end of the year," and apparently they haven't yet picked a distribution channel.

Re: did someone heard something about physis piano ???

An old thread, over 4 years since the last "opinions" were expressed.

We now have prices on physys, which now has a per note editor(optional, via PC), later versions of ptq, etc.

So, now that some folk have now actually SEEN,  PLAYED and even BOUGHT physis - also other developments in the market - what are people's current thoughts ?