• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Topic: Sympathetic resonance vs convolution

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    Sympathetic resonance vs convolution

    Now that pedal down samples can be simulated rather exactly by sympathetic resonance scripts, I'm wondering if convolution is neccesary at all any more.
    The PMI website says that two components are necessary for true sympathetic resonance: One is the sympathetic resonance script, and the other is the convolution impulse of the soundboard:

    "one is for the body resonance of the piano. A convolution engine excites a resonance model of the ENTIRE piano harp, exciting the string resonances that have a harmonic relationship with the keys struck. Pushing through a "chromatic" piano body impulse, the tone exciting the impulse will determine which of the chromatic resonances will have impact on the sound. If you play an "A" you only hear resonances related to "A" up its overtone series. The frequency components which go "un-excited" will simply disappear underneath the overall sound and be unnoticeable.
    "

    I just don't get why you need every note going through the convolution engine on top of having the sympathetic resonance script. Isn't the resonance of the soundboard allready recorded in the dry note samples?

    Thanks,
    -C.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Bruce A. Richardson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    5,755

    Re: Sympathetic resonance vs convolution

    Quote Originally Posted by cmwck
    Now that pedal down samples can be simulated rather exactly by sympathetic resonance scripts, I'm wondering if convolution is neccesary at all any more.
    The PMI website says that two components are necessary for true sympathetic resonance: One is the sympathetic resonance script, and the other is the convolution impulse of the soundboard:

    "one is for the body resonance of the piano. A convolution engine excites a resonance model of the ENTIRE piano harp, exciting the string resonances that have a harmonic relationship with the keys struck. Pushing through a "chromatic" piano body impulse, the tone exciting the impulse will determine which of the chromatic resonances will have impact on the sound. If you play an "A" you only hear resonances related to "A" up its overtone series. The frequency components which go "un-excited" will simply disappear underneath the overall sound and be unnoticeable.
    "

    I just don't get why you need every note going through the convolution engine on top of having the sympathetic resonance script. Isn't the resonance of the soundboard allready recorded in the dry note samples?

    Thanks,
    -C.
    What the scripted methods accomplish best are behavioral aspects...the way the piano action physically operates, and what resulting sounds come from it.

    I cannot speak for Michiel, but that would be my response to your question: that behavioral aspects of the piano action itself are best produced by the scripted triggering, while the behavioral aspects of the acoustic resonance are more analagous to convolution.

  3. #3

    Re: Sympathetic resonance vs convolution

    I use convolution to replace (or enhance) pedal down samples.

    Sympathetic Resonance script is used to add resonating voices when you play more keys at the same time. For example, you hold one note until it fades out, keep the key pressed (the string is no longer damped), play an octave higher and see how the first note gets "excited" by the second and starts resonating.
    Best regards,
    Michiel Post


  4. #4

    Re: Sympathetic resonance vs convolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Michiel Post
    I use convolution to replace (or enhance) pedal down samples.

    Sympathetic Resonance script is used to add resonating voices when you play more keys at the same time. For example, you hold one note until it fades out, keep the key pressed (the string is no longer damped), play an octave higher and see how the first note gets "excited" by the second and starts resonating.
    Let me rephrase my question:
    From a pure piano physics standpoint, I'm trying to get at the difference between pedal up and pedal down notes.

    Let's say you record someone playing one note with the pedal up.

    Now, record the same note at the same velocity with the pedal down.

    These two recordings will be identical, except that the second recording will have the sounds of other undamped strings ringing in the background.

    So, if you can get a hold of the pedal up recording, and mix in the sounds of the appropriate undamped strings resonating, then no further processing or convolution is required, as you've just exactly reproduced what the real piano would sound like with its pedal down.

    Correct, or am I missing something?

  5. #5

    Re: Sympathetic resonance vs convolution

    The approach that you just described is what PSR Pro does. Working with individual sounds make it possible to accurately sound only what needs to be sounded, i.e. take all key positions, and all 3 pedal postions into account at all time and dynamically sound and fade resonance samples.
    However I heard the opinion of piano library developers , when they say that additional convolution can/should/may be used I belive they know what they are talking about, I personally welcome hybrid solutions .
    Kornel
    http://music.mezo.com

Go Back to forum

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •