|
|
|
10-04-2017, 09:59 PM
|
#1
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 976
|
Piano in 162 very quiet
Piano in 162 via Plogue Sforzando is vanishingly quiet, even with the volume in Sforzando maxed, to the point where I need to turn all my other tracks down to about -20 to even hear the piano.
Googled, found one thread from 2015 on KVR, one post, never answered, never posted back.
Tried TX16Wx; it's somewhat louder, but not loud enough.
Tried JS Volume Adjustment; it kind of works, but it's hard to get it set right and I'd rather not have to.
Any ideas?
|
|
|
10-05-2017, 01:51 AM
|
#2
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 685
|
It's probably recorded with a lot of dynamic range, and so some of the samples will be very quiet. If the sampler doesn't allow you to adjust velocity -> volume ratio to make the softer notes more louder, then you'll have to compress it after the plugin. Or if you want to preserve the dynamic range, just use the Volume Adjustment plugin to turn it up. Remember to set the Max Volume slider to something like +150 though; it just acts as a nasty digital clipper for samples that go over 0dBFS (if set to 0). There's really no reason for that inside the plugin chain...
Set the volume to a comfortable level and save it as an FX chain or track template.
|
|
|
10-05-2017, 07:57 AM
|
#3
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 976
|
Yeah, I'd like to preserve the range if possible. Even the loudest samples are very quiet.
On a somewhat related note, I did save Sforzando with the 162 loaded, as well as reverb, as a track template, and then I did the same with the Salamnder C5, but it seems like Sforzando loads whatever I imported last and doesn't remember the track template settings. Any idea why that would be?
|
|
|
10-05-2017, 08:40 AM
|
#4
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: ASU`ogacihC
Posts: 3,921
|
IvyAudio-PianoIn162-Close Louder.sfz
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reason
Piano in 162 via Plogue Sforzando is vanishingly quiet, even with the volume in Sforzando maxed, to the point where I need to turn all my other tracks down to about -20 to even hear the piano.
|
I messed with 162 awhile back and had same problem with its volume, what I tried was to open the SFZ file in a text editor and raised the values for the "Volume=n" lines, not sure how well the volume scales, never actually used it, and only changed the close file.
Attached (IvyAudio-PianoIn162-Close Louder.sfz) if you want to try it.
BTW, IIRC all I did was add 20 to each value, except near the bottom where they were -12, those are playing the much louder samples, so I changed those to 3, which now actually seems a tad too loud, maybe change those to volume=0?
Last edited by Edgemeal; 04-13-2022 at 12:40 PM.
|
|
|
10-05-2017, 09:08 AM
|
#5
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Arcachon, France
Posts: 435
|
I had the same problem with the Kontakt version. Very quiet. I have too many good pianos to bother with it. Uninstalled.
__________________
Intel i9, 32 GB RAM, 7 TB SSD; Win 11 Pro; PreSonus Studio 1810c
Studio One 6 Pro; MuseScore 4; Melodyne 5 Studio; Acoustica Pro 7; Reaper 7
Gig Performer 4; NI S61 MK3; Focal Shape 65; Beyerdynamic DT 880 Pro, DT 770 Pro
|
|
|
10-05-2017, 08:09 PM
|
#6
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edgemeal
I messed with 162 awhile back and had same problem with its volume, what I tried was to open the SFZ file in a text editor and raised the values for the "Volume=n" lines, not sure how well the volume scales, never actually used it, and only changed the close file.
Attached (IvyAudio-PianoIn162-Close Louder.sfz) if you want to try it.
BTW, IIRC all I did was add 20 to each value, except near the bottom where they were -12, those are playing the much louder samples, so I changed those to 3, which now actually seems a tad too loud, maybe change those to volume=0?
|
Great, that works, yeah volume=0 smooths out the Forte notes, not sure though. Actually, now I feel like going through every note and finetuning...nah, I have other pianos....and this one has a few problems with some of the really low notes; the samples start late... for example A1 forte 1 close and ambient are about 60 ms late..I trimmed them..but haven't got around to doing some of the others. But it's a nice sounding piano.
Last edited by Goldreap; 10-05-2017 at 08:26 PM.
|
|
|
10-05-2017, 08:12 PM
|
#7
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reason
Yeah, I'd like to preserve the range if possible. Even the loudest samples are very quiet.
On a somewhat related note, I did save Sforzando with the 162 loaded, as well as reverb, as a track template, and then I did the same with the Salamnder C5, but it seems like Sforzando loads whatever I imported last and doesn't remember the track template settings. Any idea why that would be?
|
If I save a Track Template with 162 then load Salamander and save a TT with it, then load the 162 template I get 162.
|
|
|
10-05-2017, 08:22 PM
|
#8
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reason
Piano in 162 via Plogue Sforzando is vanishingly quiet, even with the volume in Sforzando maxed, to the point where I need to turn all my other tracks down to about -20 to even hear the piano.
Googled, found one thread from 2015 on KVR, one post, never answered, never posted back.
Tried TX16Wx; it's somewhat louder, but not loud enough.
Tried JS Volume Adjustment; it kind of works, but it's hard to get it set right and I'd rather not have to.
Any ideas?
|
I found this on Bedroom Producers Blog some time ago.:
"Mark on October 2, 2014 11:38 pm
I’m not experiencing any difficulty loading this library into sforzando, but I am seemingly unable to get the volume level past roughly 1/2 the full volume of the track volume (in Cubase 7.5). I’ve turned up the volume knob on sforzando to the maximum, but at 1/2 the average volume, there’s no way I could make use of this in a project. any suggestions?
Reply
Simon Dalzell on October 3, 2014 9:23 am
Hi there. Thanks for downloading the library!
I admit the samples are a bit quieter than they probably should be. I left them almost exactly as they were recorded, which maybe wasn’t actually the best idea. If you need more volume, try putting something like an equalizer or compressor on the instrument channel, then using the volume or gain function of that plugin.
Problems like these are why the library is free. I’ve learned a ton in the process of building and distributing this thing, and future libraries will require much less updating and fiddling.
Let me know if you have any other questions or recommendations!"
|
|
|
10-05-2017, 10:00 PM
|
#9
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Krefeld, Germany
Posts: 14,781
|
Did you verify the velocity of the Midi note-on events sent to the VSTi ? (e.g. watch by ReaControlMidi )
-Michael
|
|
|
10-06-2017, 08:30 AM
|
#10
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschnell
Did you verify the velocity of the Midi note-on events sent to the VSTi ? (e.g. watch by ReaControlMidi )
-Michael
|
I don't know how to do that, could you elaborate please? Are you thinking that the correct velocity levels are not being transmitted?
BTW I see that the Kontakt version does not have the low volume problem.
Last edited by Goldreap; 10-16-2017 at 06:59 PM.
Reason: Content needed revision.
|
|
|
10-06-2017, 09:12 AM
|
#11
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Arcachon, France
Posts: 435
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldreap
...
BTW I see that the Kontakt version does not have the low volume problem.
|
It did for me. See my post above.
__________________
Intel i9, 32 GB RAM, 7 TB SSD; Win 11 Pro; PreSonus Studio 1810c
Studio One 6 Pro; MuseScore 4; Melodyne 5 Studio; Acoustica Pro 7; Reaper 7
Gig Performer 4; NI S61 MK3; Focal Shape 65; Beyerdynamic DT 880 Pro, DT 770 Pro
|
|
|
10-06-2017, 09:44 AM
|
#12
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 976
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldreap
If I save a Track Template with 162 then load Salamander and save a TT with it, then load the 162 template I get 162.
|
OK, thanks for checking it out. I'll have to test more. I had both in the same project as I'm trying to A/B/C pianos, so maybe that's a factor also. Thanks for checking the sfz volume too.
@Edgemeal, I briefly checked out your file and it seemed to make a difference, so I might try to adjust the text file myself. Notepad++ has a pretty robust find/replace function that could make it fairly easy. Or not, based on the late samples issue. I looked at the file last night and it has over 18000 lines, I don't want to fix all that.
@mschnell, I copied the midi item from the track that's currently using Piano One, which does not have any volume issues. So I haven't checked it the way you suggest, but the midi velocities return acceptable volume levels using a different VST. That seems significant to me but I'm not sure I know enough to know if I'm right.
|
|
|
10-06-2017, 11:31 AM
|
#13
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMaartian
It did for me. See my post above.
|
Sorry, I had read your post but with the main focus being sfz it had not come to mind. I just checked again...my Kontakt 162 has normal volume...I've got 10 pianos lined up on 10 tracks all using the same midi item as trigger...162 sfz is the only one sounding significantly quieter. Indeed Kontakt 162 is actually a bit louder than some of the other 'normal' ones. Is yours the latest version?..I've read that he did update it at some point.
|
|
|
10-06-2017, 11:49 AM
|
#14
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reason
OK, thanks for checking it out. I'll have to test more. I had both in the same project as I'm trying to A/B/C pianos, so maybe that's a factor also. Thanks for checking the sfz volume too.
@Edgemeal, I briefly checked out your file and it seemed to make a difference, so I might try to adjust the text file myself. Notepad++ has a pretty robust find/replace function that could make it fairly easy. Or not, based on the late samples issue. I looked at the file last night and it has over 18000 lines, I don't want to fix all that.
@mschnell, I copied the midi item from the track that's currently using Piano One, which does not have any volume issues. So I haven't checked it the way you suggest, but the midi velocities return acceptable volume levels using a different VST. That seems significant to me but I'm not sure I know enough to know if I'm right.
|
Hi Reason, I just used the usual Windows notepad's replace thing to test Edgemeal's volume=0 instead of volume=3 possibility.
Re the late samples, just to clarify, the fixing I did was on the actual samples, not in the sfz file. I fixed A1, but some of the notes lower than that need it too...if you try repeating a note quickly you'll here it missing. But probably worth doing I think and shouldn't take too long.
Re your reply to mschnell, exactly what I did and what I'm thinking and what I'm wondering.?
|
|
|
10-16-2017, 04:08 PM
|
#15
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,429
|
Bit of an update to all this.
Re mschnell's suggestion about checking the velocities into the VSTi using ReaControlMIDI...OK, you can activate the MIDI activity log as the project (MIDI file) plays. No problem there..it shows the velocities I have in my MIDI file correctly.
The vol problem is simply that the four layers apart from Forte were recorded too quiet.
In the sfz file the author has tried to compensate for this with vol adjustments but didn't go far enough (and part of the balancing act was actually lowering the Forte volumes!)
In the Kontakt version he went a bit further with individual sample volumes, and a further 12db was added to the overall instrument vol.
If you leave Sforzando's volume knob at the default -4db, Edgemeal's fix (with his updated suggestion of vol=0 rather than his previous vol=3 on the Forte notes) actually exactly mirrors the author's Kontakt compensation!
I've had a detailed look at all the Piano in 162 samples and there is a lot more fixing required than I first thought...and the Kontakt version has all the same problems (same samples). In my MIDI editor I set up a climbing pattern playing 6 rapid notes on each pitch. I checked the resulting sound for the 5 different velocity layers. The problems are mainly sample starts but also a few volume mismatches. Lot of work to fix...I've done a fair bit...I might contact the author and offer it to him if I get anywhere near the end.
Last edited by Goldreap; 10-16-2017 at 07:06 PM.
|
|
|
10-16-2017, 10:07 PM
|
#16
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Krefeld, Germany
Posts: 14,781
|
I suppose, for good quality, samples in a library should be recorded with a decent level, making decent use of the sample bit count the file formant provides. Tweaking the settings is not a very good idea. I understand that any decent sampled engine is able to lower the output level of any sample when playing according to the velocity received and to the settings provided in the configuration of the sound.
-Michael
|
|
|
07-14-2020, 01:08 AM
|
#17
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 89
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldreap
Bit of an update to all this.
Re mschnell's suggestion about checking the velocities into the VSTi using ReaControlMIDI...OK, you can activate the MIDI activity log as the project (MIDI file) plays. No problem there..it shows the velocities I have in my MIDI file correctly.
The vol problem is simply that the four layers apart from Forte were recorded too quiet.
In the sfz file the author has tried to compensate for this with vol adjustments but didn't go far enough (and part of the balancing act was actually lowering the Forte volumes!)
In the Kontakt version he went a bit further with individual sample volumes, and a further 12db was added to the overall instrument vol.
If you leave Sforzando's volume knob at the default -4db, Edgemeal's fix (with his updated suggestion of vol=0 rather than his previous vol=3 on the Forte notes) actually exactly mirrors the author's Kontakt compensation!
I've had a detailed look at all the Piano in 162 samples and there is a lot more fixing required than I first thought...and the Kontakt version has all the same problems (same samples). In my MIDI editor I set up a climbing pattern playing 6 rapid notes on each pitch. I checked the resulting sound for the 5 different velocity layers. The problems are mainly sample starts but also a few volume mismatches. Lot of work to fix...I've done a fair bit...I might contact the author and offer it to him if I get anywhere near the end.
|
I also stumbled upon this piano in 162 - I must admit: despite its problems for me it is easily one of the best free pianos. The Steinway feeling is superb. Did you manage to finish the fixes that are needed to make it perfect? If so - is there a possibility to download and use that fix? I would be delighted to play this fantastic piano without the strong notes popping out so much...
|
|
|
07-14-2020, 03:03 AM
|
#18
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,429
|
Hi mcconnor,
sometime ago someone else asked via private message whether I'd finished it. This was my reply:
"Good question. No, I had to abort it. The further I went, the more discrepancies I found; not just sample starts but vol discrepancies between different notes (of the same vel layer). Tone discrepancies as well...so I did some EQing as I went. I nearly finished the Pedal Off/ Close samples...with 5 vel layers and 2 round robins per note that's 880 samples...I scrutinized them all and ended up editing over half of them I think (even if only very slightly). At this point I was thinking "OK, next I'll do the Pedal Off/ Ambient samples (another 880), then the Pedal On/ Close (another 880), then the pedal On/ Ambient (another 880).....lot of work but I like a challenge".
Then it hit me...I'd made a huge mistake....I should have been editing the close and ambient exactly in tandem...same performed note/ different mics. So I was looking at starting again from scratch. I put it aside. I also realized that I didn't really need this piano..I have others, and it was really just my obsessive nature driving things. The other thing was that all the velocity layers except forte had been recorded too quiet, so bringing up their volumes either at the sample level or with programming was also bringing up the noise floor...could just about get away with that, but I felt that 162 would never compare to a properly recorded piano no matter how much time I spent on it. Ah well, it was a good excuse to improve my REAPER editing skills."
This in no way is meant to be a criticism of the chap who recorded the piano. He himself was aware that there were problems and had explained in a forum somewhere that this was an early attempt at this sort of thing and thus the piano was free.
|
|
|
07-14-2020, 07:26 AM
|
#19
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 89
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldreap
Hi mcconnor,
sometime ago someone else asked via private message whether I'd finished it. This was my reply:
"Good question. No, I had to abort it. The further I went, the more discrepancies I found; not just sample starts but vol discrepancies between different notes (of the same vel layer). Tone discrepancies as well...so I did some EQing as I went. I nearly finished the Pedal Off/ Close samples...with 5 vel layers and 2 round robins per note that's 880 samples...I scrutinized them all and ended up editing over half of them I think (even if only very slightly). At this point I was thinking "OK, next I'll do the Pedal Off/ Ambient samples (another 880), then the Pedal On/ Close (another 880), then the pedal On/ Ambient (another 880).....lot of work but I like a challenge".
Then it hit me...I'd made a huge mistake....I should have been editing the close and ambient exactly in tandem...same performed note/ different mics. So I was looking at starting again from scratch. I put it aside. I also realized that I didn't really need this piano..I have others, and it was really just my obsessive nature driving things. The other thing was that all the velocity layers except forte had been recorded too quiet, so bringing up their volumes either at the sample level or with programming was also bringing up the noise floor...could just about get away with that, but I felt that 162 would never compare to a properly recorded piano no matter how much time I spent on it. Ah well, it was a good excuse to improve my REAPER editing skills."
This in no way is meant to be a criticism of the chap who recorded the piano. He himself was aware that there were problems and had explained in a forum somewhere that this was an early attempt at this sort of thing and thus the piano was free.
|
Fair enough - didn't realize that so much effort would be needed. I have tried many different free Pianos and never got across one that sounded so good as this one. I already applied the above mentioned fix sfz and that already makes the problem a bit lighter. I am only using the close version...
I am really curious though - what pianos would you name that would compete with this one?
|
|
|
07-14-2020, 09:02 AM
|
#20
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,429
|
^^^^ I'm not a pianist so others here would have better ideas about what is good. Just off the top of my head there's the Salamander piano in sfz format. The Production Voices Estate Grand LE is nice. The Sonivox Eighty Eight is nice (often on sale for 15 quid or so).
I wish I could offer you my edited 162 samples but at some point I deleted them from my hard drive because I was so annoyed with myself for the silly mistake and didn't want to go back there. I know what you mean though, it had a very good overall sound.
Last edited by Goldreap; 07-14-2020 at 09:08 AM.
|
|
|
07-14-2020, 01:11 PM
|
#21
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 89
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldreap
^^^^ I'm not a pianist so others here would have better ideas about what is good. Just off the top of my head there's the Salamander piano in sfz format. The Production Voices Estate Grand LE is nice. The Sonivox Eighty Eight is nice (often on sale for 15 quid or so).
I wish I could offer you my edited 162 samples but at some point I deleted them from my hard drive because I was so annoyed with myself for the silly mistake and didn't want to go back there. I know what you mean though, it had a very good overall sound.
|
Do you mind elaborating on the process of correcting the samples?
I found the software polyphone - a free sound font editor - that allows to quickly go through the samples, tweak start points of samples, tunings and volumes but I suppose you did it another way?
|
|
|
07-14-2020, 06:48 PM
|
#22
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,429
|
^^^^
I did it all in REAPER.
So for pedal off close:
Imagine a huge rectangular grid.
5 velocity layers = 5 tracks.
Each track all notes climbing chromatically, the round robins adjacent. Each sample an item.
Did the sample starts first.
Sample volumes adjusted with item vol knob rather than handle (set in preferences).
Sample EQ (if needed) done quickly by having Item FX button showing top of items (set in preferences), and dragging button from one item to another (quickly copies FX rather than having to load from scratch).
To quickly play any sample soloed I used the action "SWS/BR: Play from mouse cursor position and solo item and track under mouse for the duration (perform until shortcut released)". I assigned the action to a keyboard stroke.. very quick to hear and compare samples vertically (vel layers) and horizontally (chromatic notes and robins).
But I should have had all the pedal off ambients lined up somehow in the same grid and used item grouping to have the edits in tandem.
And since then I've thought that there are probably quicker ways to do all this...for a start maybe by normalizing all the samples first.
And maybe with some kind of scripting/ batching make it quicker to insert the samples logically in the project rather than dragging them in one by one.
What I did worked well, but I don't do this sort of thing a lot...it was an obsessive sort of thing at the time.
|
|
|
07-15-2020, 01:41 AM
|
#23
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2020
Posts: 89
|
So I guess you planned on writing back the samples with the same filenames and thereby correcting the issues on a sample basis without fiddeling with the sfz file...
|
|
|
07-15-2020, 03:52 AM
|
#24
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,429
|
Yes, writing back the samples with same file names.
I had already done the sfz file edits discussed above (which worked well as an overall velocity layer thing) and then my item vol edits were to make the sample volumes work consistently from note to note and layer to layer.
I do slightly regret aborting/ deleting what I had done so far, but at the time I saw it as 100% or nothing...I would have had to start again, doing all groups, ped off close/ambient in tandem, and ped on close/ambient in tandem ...and there's no way around the fact that the layers (except forte) were recorded too quiet with noise floor problems...actually I remember now that part of my editing involved replacing certain 'noise floor problem' notes with notes from a higher layer or sometimes re-pitched adjacent notes...the juggling did get a bit tedious.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:25 PM.
|