Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Name that sampled piano . . .

keepitsimple said:
That's why the Ravenscroft has always been my N'1.
Click to expand...
I've sort of danced around the Ravenscroft a bit. My experiences with sampled pianos have been a bit disappointing -- they never seem to work well for serious classical playing. The timbre and dynamics of the Ravenscroft do sound excellent though.
 
PianoPerson said:
I've sort of danced around the Ravenscroft a bit. My experiences with sampled pianos have been a bit disappointing -- they never seem to work well for serious classical playing. The timbre and dynamics of the Ravenscroft do sound excellent though.
Click to expand...
You'll be shocked how responsive it is. But i understand your fear. For a lot of Pianoteq fans, it's a no way back.
 
Interesting. To give you some context: I find the VSL Synchron pianos frustrating to play and didn't think much of Universal Audio Ravel. I even dislike the Garritan CFX.
 
PianoPerson said:
Interesting. To give you some context: I find the VSL Synchron pianos frustrating to play and didn't think much of Universal Audio Ravel. I even dislike the Garritan CFX.
Click to expand...
Nothing plays like the Ravenscroft. I'm a huge fan of VI Labs. They certainly have a secret sauce in terms of velocity-switching technology and what not.
 
Good to know. How is the resonance on the Ravenscroft? I mean the complex, evolving resonances inside the piano that make the sound cohesive. Pianoteq excels at this; I've never heard a sampled piano do this really well.
 
PianoPerson said:
...but not as good as Pianoteq? :grin:
Click to expand...
I say as good. The only difference you might notice is the difference in volume levels compared to Pianoteq. But that can be adjusted by your soundcard or speakers i believe.

I was doing ABCDEF testings (real time switching) all week in Studio One between Pianoteq and all the sampled pianos i still have on my SSD. And the only one who kept fighting like a champ is the Ravenscroft (volume difference aside!)
 
I mean listen, no one is more picky than i am in terms of how i want my pianos to respond. My playing can be very demanding. There's a reason i'm still vouching for the Ravenscroft...even now.
 
This thread from @CGR is maybe a good idea to introduce a new theme, that I`ve made. There are three different types of grand pianos used. The VSL Fazioli F212, Garritans Yamaha CFX and a Bösendorfer 290 which is splitted into the VSL vienna imperial and the EW Bösendorfer 290 on different mic positions. Do you hear the differences within the parts?

 
Last edited:
fan455 said:
Yeah, the way he sampled from a room perspective in Piano in 162 is similar to Pearl Concert Grand. I love this free gem so much, but found it hard to mix the close mic and ambient mic so used ambient mic solely. Having such a level of "full" sounded (rather than thin) room mic, also with hearable key press attack, is so rare. Even vsl's pianos sampled in a huge stage sounded a bit thin to me. If you raise largely its volume, you may hear more realistic Steinway B details. But only using ambient mic could really make studio quality production suck. :laugh:
Btw Piano in 162 has a so "standard", realistic and also dreamy typical Steinway tone, unlike some vintage or character Steinway sample libraries (Walker 1955, Cinepiano, SSSG or Vintage D). Maybe not that playable due to its limited velocity layers range (5 velocity layers), Thanks Ivy Audio for making this free.
Click to expand...
Playing the free 'Piano In 162' right now. If this piano had like 12 or 16 velocity layers then it probably would have been my favorite piano library. I deleted the fifth layer (ff), which makes the instrument more playable, so I only have 4 layers. Really, Ivy Audio needs to go back to this piano and redo the whole thing (exactly how they sampled it the first time but this time with a lot more layers).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom