Definite Problem With New SRX-11

[zacko]

No, I'm not a Korg employee. Actually Korg's piano samples sound and play poor to me. The Ksounds samples are from a 3rd party developer.

I'm hoping to port them over to my Fantom when I get my hands on a good mutlisample editor.

I will say that it definitely has that Roland 'ping' on a couple of notes. I find that annoying.

I'll play the SRX11 more tonight and gig with it this weekend. I'll reserve further judgment until then. It can take some time to get used to the tone of a new instrument.

Cheers.

[2TIM316]

I think maybe you guys are getting a bit to analytical. How does it sound playing some real music - Bach, Chopin, Bill Evans, Jerry Lee, etc?

[DoItAgain]

You are right man.
Much too analytical.
Keep in mind that the new piano plug-in board PLG150-AP from Yamaha has the same "ringing" problems in some key ranges (see discussion on motifator.com).
Perhaps the manufacturers are not able to produce a "perfect" sampled piano without any "bad sounding artifacts" which is not too expensive for the customer.
You know the magic triangle: Time to market, Cost, Quality.

Just heard a solo piano CD from Dave Grusin. Believe me, there are artifacts in some key ranges too, although it is an awesome recording.
So keep the music playing...

[zacko]

Just trying to help some folks. That's cool if you don't want negative opinions.

Analytical? - are you concerned about the tone and playability of your instrument?


My opinions are based on real playing. Unnatural rings and pings and noises and velocity switching problems get my attention and distract me when I'm playing.

Try it out.

[Rordog]

When it gets to the point where you don't even know if you're now hearing what you heard, and are hearing new problems, and don't even remember which octave the promblems you thought you heard but didn't hear but might've heard once were in, I'd call it over the top.

[zacko]

Do you feel better?

What I was saying is tone and playability parameters are worthy of discussion.

I said I would use it at a gig this weekend before offering further opinion. I just gave an initial impression. I can assure you I'm quite knowledgable and aware with any details I have with any of my gear. However, I think I'll refrain from further review here now.

I'd call conjuring up unfounded conclusions, and just basic insulting for no reason over the top and immature - and have nothing to do with the SRX-11. I don't care what you think.

If projecting some kind of artificial superiority makes you feel better, have at it.

[Rordog]

What kind of onwarranted conclusions have I made about you zacko? People always take personally what was a general point. It was actually Ocomain who wasn't sure if he really heard what he thought he'd heard, and not sure of the octave. I'm not insulting him either; just mentioning that when you try to pick something apart to the point you don't even know for sure what you're saying, then it might be a little bit of overanalysis.
But, since you seem to want to be personally offended, I'll mention that it was you who used the term:
"that Roland 'ping'" as though each and every make and model of roland keyboard that has a piano sound has exhibited this ping. Seems like it's you who's making the sweeping and unfounded conclusions. so there.

Don't get mad, just get even.

[ncsteff]

I think some of us are getting too serious

Zacko, please do post your impressions. I'm sure many forum members will appreciate hearing (well, reading) your thoughts. Many of us read carefully what others have described and take this into consideration when we are examining our own sound palette or considering an SRX purchase.

I also think many members will agree that attempting to mimic (synthesize) acoustic instruments is necessarily imperfect. Holy Grail seeking aside, we must individually decide whether the faults in patches are acceptable for one's musical endeavors in general, or for a specific song in particular.

As for me, I'm happy to have such a repertoire of sounds in general -- and a variety of acoustic pianos in particular -- that I can carry up a flight of stairs all by myself

ncsteff

[Rordog]

Nah, I'm not that serious. I just don't get involved in little battles of words very often. But if it comes down to just 1 note sounding out of phase, and that only in mono...
Actually, I played the SRX-11 at NAMM, and though I didn't get to spend a lot of time with it, and none of it in a quiet environment, I personally thought the high end samples, about the last octave, seemed to have too short of a wave before looping. I know this will happen trying to fit 704 samples into one 64 MB SRX, but I still think that sampling every other note in the last octave would help it sound more natural just because you could do much longer waves, almost full decays where loops wouldn't even be necessary.

[btdvox]

suddenly this post became infilterated from being a how to fix my SRX-11 and inform that there are some faults to... i think i had it transposed to i thikn my ears are f""ked to i think roland sucks hahaha. Ocomain please state the problem now and let us know if its a major problem still or if its just a small plink.

[ocomain]

Ok, took a day off, gave the ears some rest...just sat down and played the new patches again. The initial problem notes that I originally heard are in the 4th octave (the octave immediately above the Middle C octave). Sorry for the confusion, but I must have had the octave transpose button on and didn't catch it. With fresh ears, this is what I'm hearing...when you go up or down the scale slowly (no pedal), the notes have a natural decay, along with whatever fx are being applied. The problem note in the 4th octave (the exact note depends on the specific patch, though it mostly seems to be G4) doesn't have this same natural decay...it ends more abruptly, thus sounding out of place with the adjoining notes. With fast playing and\or pedaling, you probably won't notice it. Playing slowly and\or without holding the sustain pedal, it is definitely noticeable (at least to me). This problem exists in most of the solo piano patches, with the exception of the Wide Stereo and Mono patches. It doesn't seem to exist in patches like the Antique Upright, Ragtime, anything that is more processed with fx, or any of the layered patches (strings or pads).

Michael

[The Un-dr.]

ocomain,

What do you think of the "Antique Upright" and "Ragtime" patches? They're not on the Fantom X, so I'd like to know...

Any others stand out as completely different than the X?

Thanks!

[ocomain]

I don't have the Fantom X, just the S but there definitely some piano patches on this card that have a distinct character to them. Ragtime Grand sounds like a good ol' Scott Joplin type of instrument (very authentic sounding, slightly out of tune). Another patch, Archive Piano, sounds like it was lifted off an old radio recording from a bygone era. The Antique Upright patch has become one of my favorites, really reminding me of several pianos I have owned...a softer sound yet very "present". Another favorite, Warm Room Pianoforte, is very soft and atmospheric, very intimate sounding. Other favorites include some of the layered patches (my fav is New Age...piano with D-50 bells and female oohs), a couple of reverse piano patches (Meditate has piano with reverse piano, and a stream sound combined with a warm pad). Penta Duo is a dual piano sound using the pentatonic scale. Barococo is piano, piccolo and organ (think Baroque meets Rococo...kinda like a harpsichord with organ undertones...fun!). Pianolins sounds like a modulating tape loop instrument, an interesting mix of piano or strings...you can't quite tell. My least 2 favorite patches are at the end, RandoMeistro gives you random octaves of the same note, and Spooky Dimin gives you an arpeggio...diminished, of course. Other un-favorites are Custom Clav (why bother?) and Gnu House. Otherwise, I really like these pianos and shall find them extremely useful.

Michael

[zacko]

I apologize if I got so defensive.

I just don't want to get into SRX11 finite detail until I've given a good evaluation both at home and gigging. I agree that certain artifacts and overtones can add character to the sound. I remeber when I first got the SRX02, I initially hated the pianos. It took me a while to get used to it as an instrument, and turned out I used it for years as a choice. So, I don't want to jump the gun on this one.

I also do a solo piano gig, and I really want to try out the SRX11 there, and get some feedback from my singer. He's very knowledgable about tones and sound. We're all piano and vocal so that'll be a good test.

As far as the Roland 'ping' (if that's what you call it) - yes every Roland digi piano and sample of late (home pianos too) I've played has the ping in one of the c-d-e-f-g5 area. That's with exception of the SRX02. Don't know about the FAX. I can hear it instantly. Maybe it's just something that I have grown to notice. Personally, it distracts me.


BTW, I played the SRX-11 at sound check today and got some good compliments, and it felt good in a band/mix context although only for two half-songs.

Can wait to gig tonight - I'll have lots of solo and improvising opportunites.

Cheers,

[dansgold]

It's my informed opinion that analyzing pianos will eventually drive you stark raving mad if you let it.

I am basing this on my experience with real pianos. I managed a full-line music store which sold (among other things) acoustic pianos - grands, uprights and spinets - from Yamaha, Baldwin and Kawai, and employed 3 fulltime piano tuner/technicians.

Every single one of them (despite being a very skilled technician) was a complete raving lunatic.

If you study the nature of a piano's physical design ... the interaction of keys, hammers, 3 strings per key, harp, soundboard, pegboard, cabinetry and the environment in which the piano "lives"... you come to the opinion that there is always going to be something out-of-whack at any given moment, and different things out-of-whack from moment-to-moment.

What "saves" most players from perceiving these moment-to-moment imperfections is that they are "aperiodic", meaning that they do not repeat themselves or they occur at completely random intervals.

So, you get a top-of-the-line 9-foot grand, have it serviced and tuned by a top-class technician, sit down and play. At some point in time - if you are listening critically - you will notice something "off". then you try to find that "off bit" and duplicate it. You can't. Then you start playing and notice it again. You start hitting one note at a time at various velocities. Then on one key you notice something else odd, only to find that you can't reproduce it after a half hour on plunking away on that single key.

So you start to play again, and then you hear a new problem different from the earlier 2. But you aren't able to reproduce it either. But suddenly - in the middle of trying to reproduce the 3rd problem - you hear something else.

All of this is happening on a real, top-quality acoustic instrument that has been well tuned and serviced, and is free from any physical defects.

This happens with every acoustic piano ever made, and it's why pianos tuners go crazy.

The reason why every sampled piano ever created suffers from multiple reports of "this piano sucks" is because the process of sampling captures a moment in time for that specific key/velocity. Capturing 4 samples-per-key captures 4 such moments-in-time.

The process of creating a good-quality sampled piano is full of the same kinds of little bits of madness encountered by piano tuners, and they are perfectly captured for all time. Attempts to completely eliminate them usually end up sounding lifeless and lacking character.

The only way to create a sampled piano with all the craziness, life and character is to create one with all of that randomish, "aperiodic imperfection". Such an undertaking would probably require a minimum of 8 distinct samples for one each of 8 velocity levels for each key. You''d then have to put together some fancy techniques for having the 8 samples at each velocity levels trigger in semi-random fashion with repeated key presses. I can't imagine undertaking such a project without going just as batty as the average piano tuner!

Of course there is the "pure math" option: acoustic modeling. Several mathematicians have gone looney trying to put together accurate mathematical models of acoustic pianos.

So, my advice would be to get whatever you like best. Try not to listen toooo closely, and have a good time.

'Cuz ... pianos? They're crazy man, crazy.