20 Jan
2019
20 Jan
'19
12:40 a.m.
On Sat, 19 Jan 2019, Ralf Mattes wrote:
Well, it all depends :-)
I my world there's a group of users for whose field standard MIDI just does'nt
work: teaching
and researching professional piano playing. The main obstacle is (the missing)
velocity/volume/attack speed
resolution. So our teachers and researchers need to use the partly-proprietary Yamaha
Disklavier.
So,for them, a modern MIDI 2 is appreciated.
Cool. I do wonder where the sample sets are that actually have 127 samples
per note. Certainly Pianoteq might have a full range but most of the
electric pianos I have heard sound more like in "Bennie" than anything
that actually came from strings. I am talking about the people who walk
into a music store and buy an electric piano or other stage keyboard.
Now any of those people would prefer to sit down in front of an acoustic
piano, but none of them can afford (or are willing to afford) an electric
stage/home piano which actually sounds real. Remember that "most" people
would never think about using a keyboard controller to get sound from
their computer.
In the case of keyboard synth combinations, where the signal path is
kb->midi->internal synth. MIDI 2 may show some improvements that even the
average person will notice. In time such an instrument may even be cheap
enough for "most" people. However, it seems to me that the synth in the
pianos I have seen does not even fully use the 128 velocity values
available now.
In terms of velocity vs. amplitude I would guess that 127 levels at 1db
per level covers more than most ADC's would show. At .5db per level the
range is still probably wider than the dynamic range available in a nice
quiet studio/sound stage... so I would hope that the range of timbre
differences makes a wider range of velocities worth while. I would like to
see a blind AB test where the same performance is rendered by the same
synth in both MIDI 1 and MIDI 2.
--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net