Dear Bill, yes, I’ve conducted productions in my career at the Kravis, it is a very nice arts center. I should have been more specific in saying for a concert pianist in recital or concerto. That you won’t see. And trust me, no serious classical pianist uses a Clavinova to practice. I’m sorry the discussion has gotten off its original topic. The difference is that between a very good sampled piano keyboard and a concert grand. Please enjoy yours! Best, Tim
Why not the piano as a reference for bass
I see a lot of commentary/reviews on a systems bass response that all seem to hinge on the 41 hz double bass and such range. At 27.5 the A0 note on a piano seems a better point to judge. Lots of piano in normal music vs say an organ note. I know when I feel that deep chord played it is one of things I enjoy about listening the most! Was listening to Wish you were here live and the piano was sublime.
So is it more of how much musical energy is perceived in the 40 hz range or what that makes this more of a reproduction benchmark?
I welcome your input!
New Joe Bonamassa out BTW!
86 responses Add your response
Well Tim, I already related the story of the local Yamaha dealer renting the Kravits Center here in West Palm Beach where the Clavinova was definitely on stage. So the only part of not in your lifetime that you can cling to is the relative standing of the Kravits Center among the world's better venues. On that score you can relax. But there us no question that this instrument is for home use, not for world class performance. With that said, it would not surprise me if world class performers are using them for practice. If my local dealer is to be trusted that is a fact. For me the over riding consideration is that mine sounds exactly like a C7 to my ears and is always in tune. |
It's not limited to square waves. A sawtooth wave also has an instantaneous rise or fall time, as the case may be. In the real world of music, a square wave would most sound like a clarinet, a sawtooth wave like a string, with bow spikes, a sine wave like a flute, and a triangular wave "flute-like" though none of these instruments are "pure of wave". |
@timstella Even Yamaha only claims that their Clavinovas approach the sound quality of the best concert grand pianos.
On the other hand, they have all the benefits of digital including being affordable enough and small enough for home use |
An infrasonic square wave, and in fact any square wave, theoretically contains every higher harmonic right up to infinity. As such every driver in a conventional dynamic speaker will contribute, and the tweeter in principle will be fed infinite power. Fortunately, the slew rate of any real-world amplifier is not infinitely fast. My favourite digital format, Direct Stream Digital, cannot even represent a square wave, any more than a vinyl groove can. I cannot think of any natural phenomenon that produces a true square wave. |
I cannot thank enough the person here ( i dont remember who) who recommended to use this small organ interpretation of the Bach Klavier which is truly astounding : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyGMg1GcqkU&list=PLaK8vS3Zo1ShbeZE1EZZi-6z6V3C0eRY6 |
I privately messaged Bill Stevenson, respecting his opinion on the latest Clavinova. |
The attack on a pipe organ on a really deep note takes time for the pipe/chamber to fill so the note comes on more gradually. A synthesizer can play basically any waveform all the way down to subharmonic. A subharmonic square wave with an instantaneous rise time is harder on the speakers that have to make the transition more quickly. |
I recently bought Hyperion’s CD (no SACD available) of Marc-Andre Hamelin playing the opus 106 Hammerklavier Sonata. According to the notes, during its composition Beethoven was given a Broadwood piano from London. Like Viennese pianos of the time, these had a six octave range, but started half an octave lower at CC compared to FF. The first two movements of the sonata use the higher range, the last two the lower one. So it would seem that Beethoven did indeed compose for a future instrument, since no single piano he was aware of could manage all the notes in the Hammerklavier Sonata. Similar thinking is behind the Stuart and Sons extended keyboard instruments, which have some other revolutionary features including a fourth pedal, which moves the hammer closer to the strings for really soft playing. The strings couple to the soundboard vertically rather than horizontally, and transmit more sound energy than conventional pianos. They are deliberately designed for a livelier sound than say Steinways or Bosendorfers. |
You are well ahead of me, I can't even play the drums. But I did not make up the bit about Yamaha using sound recorded from a Bosendorfer Imperial! From Yamaha's Australian website: CLP-765GP - Features - Clavinova - Pianos - Musical Instruments - Products - Yamaha - Music - Australia
|
Artificially generated sound hurt my soul... Generally... Why ?
Because a Natural vibrating sound source, a pipe organ for example or a piano string transmit an acoustical information about its physical state... An electronical sound do not... Sound is not a subjective experience only it is an objective takes on some aspect of the physical world (timbre) informing us....
It is why i hate A.I. invasion so useful it could be on some specfic case... I dont listen electronica....
|
What synthesizer can we hear, preferably on record, that can compare and exceed the rich harmonics of a pipe organ? Why is fast attack preferrable to slow? Does something that is below the threshold of human hearing add to the enjoyment of the musical experience in some subliminal way? Just wondering. |
It is evident that nothing beat the organ if we want to test the bass depth. But there is other dimensions of bass we can test best with a piano. Bass is a multidimensional band registers set related to timbre in acoustical normal conditions, for this a piano cannot replace an organ, nor the reverse and the tuba is as the viol an indispensable tool. Music is rooted in timbre perception not in frequencies per se ( as a source of information communicated by the vibrating sound source). I am not a musician nor an acoustician. It is only what i learned tuning my system/room ...
|
Well timstella, I would never presume to tell you or anyone else what you can hear. I can tell you that in one iteration of my life I was in fact a professional musician. Although I joke about it: How many musicians are there in a 15 piece band? Answer: 14 and a drummer. I was the drummer. Anyway I always had, and even though with age my hearing has diminished, still am blessed with pretty good hearing. If you have the opportunity, I encourage to try to listen to, and to play if possible, one of the new Clavinova pianos in comparison to either a C7 or a C9. You will be astonished. To change the subject, have you heard a demonstration of the excellent modern stringed instruments compared to the best of the traditional ones such as Stradivarius or Guarneri? To my ears the only real miss is the viola and even they are really excellent. Given the astronomical prices of the traditional ones it is a real breakthrough that such wonderful instruments being made again. And now back to pianos, sorry my mind wanders, Beethoven was limited by the piano technology available during his lifetime. It is interesting to speculate that perhaps with advances in technology perhaps a future composer will expand the possibilities of piano music yet to come. |
With all due respect to billstevenson, there have been so many attempts for decades to come up with a substitute for the acoustic piano that doesn’t need tuning, etc., and Yamaha has been at the forefront with their hybrid, Clavinova, and other models. Yes, they have made improvements in the sampled piano, but it is still a canned sound, not an acoustic instrument. As in a sampled electronic pipe organ, despite the increased resolution, etc., there is still no way to recreate the multiplicity of so many sound sources, no matter how many audio channels and samples are used to create the random complexity of the acoustic instrument. A professional musician can tell you that you can take the highest quality string samples for instance, and that in a simple example may sound good, as soon as you layer more and more, the result homogenizes and sounds less convincing. But if for example, you keep adding more acoustic string instruments, the sound gets more and more complex, and is easily recognized as far superior to the canned samples. It has to do with the infinite number of variables in individual bowings, vibratos, intonation, and many other factors. Also, we are trying to convert this enormous complexity into an electronic signal, reproduced by audio transducers. The fact is that we’re conditioned to believe that the sample is the real deal in live performance, Broadway shows, and recordings. I maintain that I can take a child and sit them in front of a real cello, and there will be no question of how they will respond to the physical affect of that instrument as opposed to a recorded sample. |
While I can agree that no speaker system can fully capture the sound of an acoustic piano, at least within the context of what I have heard from sound systems, Yamaha has carved out something different with their top level Clavinova instruments. These are not trying to reproduce the sound of a piano recording in the context that is normally contemplated. Rather they were conceived to produce (as opposed to reproduce) the sound of a piano. I have heard the result compared to Yamaha's C7 and C9 and the result is remarkable. How a Bosendorfer would compare I cannot say. The standard was Yamaha, not Bosendorfer, so presumably the difference would be obvious. |
I am a professional pianist/ organist, and was an agent for Bosendorfer piano many years ago. I use the 97 key Imperial at my church, and have my favorite Bosendorfer 7 foot, 4 inch model at home. The lowest notes on the Imperial contain so little fundamental frequency energy, that even the most skilled piano technicians are very challenged to tune those pitches properly! The reason for the extra nine notes was for scaling and tone. Strings close to the rim do not resonate as well because the soundboard best resonates in the middle area. This is true of any vibrating membrane on any musical instrument! On the Imperial Grand, now the string of the lowest A on a regular piano crosses almost down the middle of the soundboard, creating its beautiful singing quality with almost organ like sustain! On a Steinway, one can achieve power, but with much quicker attenuation than the Bosendorfer, because the string is much closer to the rim. BUT, there still is no comparison to an organ pipe as a bass reference because of the sheer physics of the pipe itself, creating the true fundamental bass frequency! So yes, the piano is a great instrument for testing speaker accuracy, but for a variety of other reasons, not for bass! And no, I’ve never heard a speaker sound like a live Bosendorfer, but the closer they can get is a great evaluation tool for quality audio reproduction. |
Looking at Yamaha's website, it seems at least some Clavinova electronic pianos use actual recordings of single piano notes, played at varying intensities. The actual recordings are taken from a Bosendorfer and a Yamaha Concert Grand. During play, the notes are mixed and reverberations from the other strings are calculated, along with reverberations from the soundboard and the body of the piano. For headphone output, this is done in stereo. Yamaha has been a leader in digital signal processing with its AV Receivers, and its NS-5000 speaker family has been a classic for decades. Not to mention motorbikes and jet-skis |
Thank you, @mahgister! Very glad to hear Seth Kaufman's music speaks to you too! |
it is probably the best piano recording i heard but because it is only on youtube i cannot be sure but in fact i think even through youtube i am pretty sure it will be my best piano recording ..... Amazing.. I also use piano as the best instrument to test my system/room not just bass alone but the relation between bass and the other frequencies... The piano timbre is in a way more complex more multidimensional more hard to get right in recording process as in playback process in a room ... I like the music of Seth Kaufman a lot...Not only the sound ... Thanks.... Among my three favorite pianists only one is well recorded... ( Sofronitsky and Nyiregyházi are badly recorded , they are my two best only the third Ivan Moravec is relatively well recorded but nothing like this recording of Kaufman)
|
@mahgister , I particularly like "Repercussion". At one point about halfway through Seth stands up and leans forward and plucks the strings with his fingers. I didn’t realize that’s what was going on until I saw him perform it live. It had never occurred to me that plucking the strings of a piano is a thing. Aside from that, "Repercussion" gives me chills every time I listen to it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMI_SsJN6Zg (In case it's not obvious, yes I absolutely use solo piano music for evaluating speakers and for showing them off... but I'm showing off "see, that sounds like a real piano" instead of "listen to that amazing bass".) Duke |
You were right if i even listen to it from youtube... It is well recorded to say the least... I will buy it thanks .. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0KJ1QqfJjY&list=RDr0KJ1QqfJjY&start_radio=1 |
@mahgister wrote: "Could you please name one or two even three albums of piano very well recorded...i want to buy them... "It is very important because as you i think piano sound is a judge in my system/room..." You might consider "Red Descending" by solo artist Seth Kaufman. Seth was a medical student in New Orleans when I first heard him play at a Barnes & Noble. He blew me away so I bought his album, "Circling Noon". When his new (at the time) album came out, "Red Descending", I bought it because I was already enjoying "Circling Noon" immensely. Loved it, still do. Then I got a chance to hear him live again in a real venue, and the Yamaha grand piano he was playing sounded to me just like the one on "Red Descending" (I had been listening to the album over Sound Lab electrostats). After the performance I asked him about it, and he said YES, it WAS the same piano! He'd gone to the trouble and expense of having his piano crated and trucked from New Orleans to the recording studio in Los Angeles for recording the album. Not that I am any expert on piano recordings, but apparently "Red Descending" is a good enough recording that a non-piano-player could tell with pretty high confidence when he heard that same piano again. Duke |
Amazing post! and truthful for me... Could you please name one or two even three albums of piano very well recorded...i want to buy them... It is very important because as you i think piano sound is a judge in my system/room... Thanks for your time...
|
This is a most interesting discussion. Ruminating further about past experiences is pertinent. First a disclaimer. I can hear the difference between any two pianos. Let me explain. When I have gone to the Steinway studio, something I have done in Seattle, San Francisco, and NYC in years go by, I have easily been able to distinguish the sound of not only say a B from a D, but B1 from B2 from B3, and D1 from D2 etc. Or in another setting, upon entering a hall, without looking I have been able over the years to tell if the piano is a Mason & Hamlin (a favorite of mine) or a Baldwin etc. With that as a back drop, in my misspent youth I tried (and failed miserably) to record pianos. Choice of mics, mic placement, mic distance, room acoustics, all muck things up. These factors make good piano recordings a rare and precious commodity. But if you find a good one, and there are good ones, IMHO, there is no finer recording to judge your system than a good piano recording. From top to bottom. Bass included. |
All I can tell you is what my ears tell me. For reference in my own listening room I have recently replaced a Yamaha C7 with a Clavinova. I did this because to my ears the difference when the C7 is in tune was indistinguishable from the Clavinova and more importantly for me, the latter is always in tune. I am not a pianist, however, but rather a drummer for whom the piano is a means to an end. YRMV. |
Could you name the artist in this album ? Effectively the viol is also an instrument useful to test bass rendition...
|
Re piano. I rediscovered an album from long ago that I found in the cut-out bin of a long-forgotten record store. The title is "audio symphony", Check up your sounds Vol, 1. It was produced by RCA Japan in 1976 and distributed by Audio Technica. It has a 14 page insert describing all the equipment used and even includes the music score sheets. Although it goes into minute detail of the equipment used it does not describe the piano. Notable is the use of an Ampex 440c and Studer A-80MK II reel to reel. Both running at 30 ips. The sound quality is astoundingly good with dynamic range and quit background even on my modest system, The bass quality of the piano is remarkably good but I would agree that it is not the best test of a systems bass agility and depth. Also, as someone else mentioned bowed string bass (in this case a trio playing in unison) is also a pretty good measure, |
At the risk of stating the bleeding obvious, electronic pianos contain sound systems, with all their faults and idiosyncrasies. At least some of Yamaha's Clavinova range contain cone drivers and use piano wood for the pulp
|
I went to a violin / piano recital at the Sydney City recital hall last week, where in the 20 minute interval, a piano tuner came on stage to work on the concert grand piano in full view of those who did not need a beer or a bubbly! That’s pressure ... It would be interesting to learn if Yamaha bothers to synthesize the fundamentals for the lowest notes, or just creates the harmonics. And to learn about the transducers (speakers) they use to produce the sound. These extra variables are why I suggested doing your own experiment on a genuine mechanical piano. It is no use listening to recordings through loudspeakers especially if the speakers are in your laptop. In my sleep last night, I thought of another reason why the piano is an excellent sound reference. It is because the sound produced from a single key depends only on how quickly the key is pressed, and the piano itself. The ’touch’ of the pianist is irrelevant because the hammer mechanism is decoupled from the key mechanism. That is unless the pianist reaches inside and manipulates the strings ... |
A few years ago the local Yamaha piano dealer rented our local concert hall, The Kravits Center, in West Palm Beach, for an entire weekend to promote pianos. A concert pianist was hired to demonstrate and compare the entire range of instruments from the mighty C9 on down. The most impressive range to me were the upper end of the Clavinova range. These are electronic instruments voiced to clone the sound of Yamaha C7 and C9 Concert Grands. The keyboards are dimensioned and weighted to mimic the full sized instruments as well. Some very accomplished pianists tried them and verified the claim. I have perfect pitch and in terms of tonality and dynamics at least in the hall going from one to the other, the sound was indistinguishable. That was on day one. By day 3, the C7 was going ever so slightly out of tune which gave it away in favor of the Clavinova. The C9 held firm. |
@richardbrand wrote: "To discover what the first overtone sounds like, move up one octave and play that key. If the two notes sound as if they are the same frequency, then you cannot hear the lowest fundamental. But my experience on a Kawai upright piano is exactly the opposite, the lowest note is clearly an octave lower and is clearly audible." I don’t think this is the proof you think it is, and I hope you don’t mind me posting a somewhat counter-intuitive contrary opinion. Even if we cannot hear the lowest fundamental, those two notes will NOT sound as if they are the same frequency because the interval between the harmonics is TWICE as wide for the key that is one octave higher. The ear/brain system PERCEIVES the missing fundamental by inferring it from the interval (or spacing) between the harmonics. Please Google "missing fundamental", as this perceptual phenomenon is very much in play at the far left-hand end of the piano keyboard. |
I want to try to nip this idea off, here and now! Just try this little experiment. Find yourself a mechanical (not electronic) piano and play the lowest key. You will hear the fundamental note, plus overtones. To discover what the first overtone sounds like, move up one octave and play that key. If the two notes sound as if they are the same frequency, then you cannot hear the lowest fundamental. But my experience on a Kawai upright piano is exactly the opposite, the lowest note is clearly an octave lower and is clearly audible. Just in case somebody suggests that the fundamental one octave up is also inaudible, hop another octave up and repeat. They cannot all be inaudible! Why an octave? An octave is just double the frequency and in Western music there are eight white piano keys spanning an octave (which is why the Latin for eight features in its name). There are seven white keys and five black keys before each octave pattern repeats - 12 notes in all. When Pete Townshend said he chose his double bass for the session, he doubled his pay by doubling this on an electric bass guitar 12 notes higher. Had me a bit confused but he was just playing one octave up, something very common in orchestral pieces where cellos double the basses, the picolo doubles the flute and so on. The physics of the fundamental vibration of a string are well known. The vibration frequency depends on the length of the string, the mass of the string and the tension in it. The fundamental frequency is where the entire string between its fixed ends moves in the same direction. But there is another mode, where the middle of the string remains stationary, and the two halves move in opposite directions. This is the first harmonic, and it is an octave up from the fundamental. And there are even more vibration modes, where there are four, five, six and so on stationary points in the string. By and large these modes do not sound pleasing. One more thing. A string can also vibrate along its length, and that vibration can be picked up. Usually the sound is horrible, like a violinist’s finger sliding on the string. When bowing, it is important that the bow remains at right angles to the string to avoid longitudinal resonances. It is said that violinists take about five years to learn how to use the left hand to get the right notes. The next five years is learning how to bow properly. So can piano be a useful guide to loudspeaker bass reproduction? Absolutely. I will take four speakers I am familiar with as examples. The first is the market-leading bookshelf speaker from KEF – the LS50. Its bass output has a 3-db roll-off at 79-Hz, which is well over an octave above the 31.5-Hz fundamental of a standard piano’s lowest note. You won’t get much of its first harmonic either! Staying with KEF but spending maybe eight times as much, we get the slightly bigger bookshelf KEF Reference 1. Its 3-db bass rolloff is at 45-Hz so you will not get much of the fundamental but the first harmonic should be all there. My third speaker is a full-range electrostatic from Quad – the ESL-2905. I cannot find its 3db rolloff but it is flat to 45-Hz and 6db down at 31-Hz. No real need for a subwoofer here. Finally to a subwoofer – the 18” servo controlled Velodyne DD-18. This has a 3db rolloff at 14.1-Hz, more than an octave below that fundamental. Good for a Bosendorfer or Stuart concert grand. The Velodyne fleshes out the Reference 1 beautifully, and takes a bit of the bass load off the Quad, which otherwise has little need of a sub. |
Alas no! I am slightly friendly with several organists in Sydney but none has hinted when that 64 foot monster might be exercised. Mostly I hear church and cathedral organs, and the refurbished beast in the Sydney Opera House. Olivier Latry, the organist from Notre Dame in Paris, featured in Saint-Saens Organ Symphony and Poulenc's Concerto for Organ, Strings and Timpani - one of my personal favourites. The next day we went to his organ masterclass at the Opera House. It is amazing how each student had a USB stick with their personal settings for the organ configuration. I'd like to build a relational database representing that organ and its multiplicity of parts. I have heard a piano recital given on a Sturt and Sons concert grand piano, but not the full 108-key model. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation released video and CDs of Beethoven's Piano Concertos played on a Stuart piano. |
Have you witnessed the 64 foot pipe? I've always wondered what the experience would be like. You probably never hear/feel that pipe by itself so maybe hard to describe. I'm sure you do feel it but it's hard to imagine hearing nothing at the same time. Am I making any sense? Just curious about this and have started conversations before about what we can hear/feel below 20hz. I have read that in some instances, some people are able to hear down to 12hz. I heard 17hz on my system with a test record, rather subtle but there. Nothing below that and nothing felt, probably just exceeded system capabilities. Played louder, I might have heard something, hard to say. Anyway, fun stuff. |
I have always used well recorded piano compositions as an analytical tool for determining system. I will attempt to explain how I use piano recordings as an analytical tool. Rather than concertos and symphonies, it is best sonatas. I have some sonatas that, rather than solo piano, add a violin. That is in my opinion the best analytical tool. So how and why? … Crossover and Driver Integration: The piano, as others stated, is a singular instrument covering a broad frequency range. Problems with speaker driver integration and crossover design, or issues with ragged frequency response of electronics become easily evident by using well recorded piano recordings. As an example, in my past, I had hybrid Apogees. The lower piano registers were slow and smeared compared to the wonderful midrange and highs. Dynamics: While not the best test for percussive crescendos or rock dynamics, the piano by definition as a percussion instrument, is one of the best instruments to use for analyzing system dynamics, especially microdynamics. While I agree in part with @audiokinesis that the fundamental and first overtones do not have the same impact as other instruments, well recorded closed miked piano will have strikingly vivid first wave percussive impact. The real value is in analyzing the microdynamics of secondary harmonics and how ppp notes are developed in a composition. Detail Retrieval: Well recorded piano is an excellent test for detail retrieval including, harmonic decay, the sound of the hammers vs the strings vs sound board, as well as how the notes decay into the venue. Piano recordings can easily discern engineering techniques such as close miking vs far miking. A well designed audiophile system should be able to discern these attributes of well recorded piano. Here, combined with my discussion on dynamics, is where the piano is excellent for bass analysis. Analyze bass note first wave (fundamental impact). Is it sharp and striking. Analyze how it decays and the sound of all the secondary harmonics. Determine if you can discern the hammer strike from the string sound and sound board. This is an excellent test for comparing equipment. Imaging: Closed miked piano recordings will be able to develop an image that shows the position of the mike relative to the keyboard. Image palpability will be evident. In conclusion, piano recordings are an excellent analytical tool in general, and for bass as well. Yes, you will need to use other records of other instruments to analyze bass impact, but these others are not as good for bass detail and especially for bass integration. Apologies for my usual pontifications and typos in advance. |
@audiokinesis From the comments, the guy who posted that video had no idea what microphone was used, let alone what piano or where the microphone was positioned! What I do find interesting is the low modes that are excited when high pitch notes are played. As I wrote above, the whole piano resonates - after all, it is filled with more than 88 tuned resonators and felt can only damp so much. Sure the low notes also carry a lot of harmonics, which is why the piano sounds like a piano and not like a pure pipe organ. Agreed, many people may not hear the fundamentals of low notes, and few indeed will directly hear the 16-Hz fundamental of a 108-key Stuart piano's lowest note. Few subwoofers will even go close with any sort of accuracy. Same goes for the 8-Hz fundamental of Sydney Town Hall's organ with its 64 foot long Gravissima pipe. You can't hear it but you can certainly feel it! |
@richardbrand wrote: "I don’t agree that the low notes on a modern grand piano (piano-forte or soft-loud) contain so little energy that they do not merit being reproduced. Bosendorfer and Stuart keep extending the keyboard downwards!" Just to be clear, I’m not saying that the lowest notes on a normal grand piano contain so little energy that they do not merit being reproduced. I’m saying that the lowest fundamentals (and sometimes the corresponding first overtones) of the lowest notes of a non-Bosendorfer grand piano contain so little energy that they do not merit being reproduced in a live music setting. I don’t know whether this is a grand piano or not, but it shows the spectra of the lowest notes starting with A0. Pause it after each note and look at how much energy is in the fundamental and first overtone: piano sound spectrum - YouTube Anyone else interested in why piano might or might not be a good instrument for evaluating a speaker’s bass response is invited to do the same. There’s just not a whole lot of true low bass energy. |
Thanks for the clarification! I don’t agree that the low notes on a modern grand piano (piano-forte or soft-loud) contain so little energy that they do not merit being reproduced. Bosendorfer and Stuart keep extending the keyboard downwards! I don’t think Beethoven would have agreed either - he was very quick to extend the range he wrote for when gifted pianos which went further up and down! There is of course a fundamental difficulty in judging sound quality against amplified sources - there is no original to compare to. Anyway, I use soft piano music to judge atmospherics and double bass for bass impact ... but the main thing is to enjoy your music |
@richardbrand , my investigation into the loudness of the fundamentals and first few overtones of the lowest piano notes was based on the spectra of those notes played on a grand piano, as I figured that would be applicable to amplified electric piano. I presume the electric piano was "attempting to sound like a real piano". My customer said that he used the same model electric piano as Elton John. He mentioned it to me but I don't remember the specific model. I think it was a Yamaha. |
No doubt the electric piano was attempting to sound like a real piano? When I play the lowest note on an acoustic piano, the amount of sound energy output is pretty directly related to how quickly I press the key. There is no artificial limit, and no shortage of sound either. The key mechanism is mechanical, not some electronic switch or sensor. And the whole piano resonates |