CyberGene

Some people are prone to the opposite effect, that of “Choice-supportive bias” (AKA post-purchase rationalization) to counteract the “buyer’s remorse” though, and so these people also never experience it. Not saying that’s the case.

If they switch to TP110 and improve their EP-s, they will be much more desirable for me personally.

I have Arturia V and the Logic Pro X electric piano (both modeled) but I'm not convinced by these modeled pianos, seems I prefer samples. I have also listened to Lounge Lizard demos and I owned a Numa X piano (also with modeled Rhodes) and to me all modeled Rhodes pianos have some rubbery effect to them. Anyone tried this? https://www.uvi.net/en/pianos-keyboards/key-suite-electric.html That library seems enormous with 63 different electromechanical instruments sampled (14GB of FLAC samples or 63GB in WAV). I already own VILabs Modern U and UVI Workstation with iLok, so it's OK for me to use that workstation, actually it's a very lean software that I like (in contrast to Kontakt).

What would be a good Rhodes plugin that doesn't require Kontakt Player? I'm sick of Kontakt and won't ever install that abomination on my computer again. Currently I'm using the Rhodes sounds in my CP88 when recording Rhodes in Logic and all is good since the CP88 sends clean digital audio through USB but a bit more flexibility with a standalone plugin won't be bad. The one in Logic is OK but I prefer sampled ones. When I last listened to different modeled Rhodes they all sounded too rubbery and synthetic but they may have improved in the last years?

I’ll wait for the second Rhodes decline to get one of these for $200 off a garage sale some day 😛

I’ve tried Nord Electro with hammer action that felt horrible, it’s that awful TP-100LR. It’s beyond me how one can use that action in an instrument that costs more than €330. Mind you, I couldn’t stand it even in my €330 Studiologic SL73. But each to their own. I’ve also tried a Nord Piano that had OK-ish action but the piano sounds just didn’t feel connected to the action. I like their ergonomic though. But then there’s the Yamaha CP/YC with so much better action and sounds.

I get your point but that couldn't be further from the truth 😀 I can recognize the Pianoteq fakeness from a mile. Especially compared to a real acoustic piano recording which is just another universe. But let's not start that here... As I said, I get the point and I agree with it 👍🏻 I'm also influenced a lot by how things look and feel and I prefer the real wood and smell and feel, I love limitations that provoke creativity. Basically I agree with everything you said. However, I still find this as a bit superficial and that's a self-critique, I would have preferred if I was more one of those guys who are practical and save money by buying stuff that works, regardless of its aesthetics or other non-essential (to its purpose) values 😕

If they didn’t copy the design error there would be folks criticizing Behringer for “drifting” off the true Minimoog 😉

In fairness to CP, you can have up to 5 effects simultaneously. This is valid only for the electric piano section (but there’s the advanced mode to use any of the sounds in that section): two insert FX, amp, global delay send, global reverb send. Well, the two insert effect slots can select from just six types each for a total of 12 which is a bit limited to the big variety of effects on the YC. And in the acoustic piano and sub sections there’s only one FX slot with a very limited choice of effect types. Edit: actually there’s a global send FX on the YC where you can choose not just a delay but also other FX types which is even better.

Yes, I remember that. But it would nevertheless been better if the global reverb was more configurable, so that you can use all the individual effects slots for other effects where needed. Anyway, both the CP and YC have their cons and pros. I can only dream but if there was a new instrument type in the Yamaha stage line that had the YC61 form-factor and keyboard action and kept the YC-organ engine but replaced the pianos/electric pianos sections with a dedicated synth engine (even if a simplified one, like on the reface CS), that would be the perfect complement to a CP.

Same with the reverb, on the CP I have both “time” and “depth” whereas on the YC there’s only depth.

I owned a Peak for a while and I’d say I really liked it a lot but its filter was a bit characterless and generic sounding, not Moogish. This and the fact everything is potentiometers and loading a patch you can’t immediately see the actual settings made me sell it but not without a lot of hesitation. I’d buy a Summit.

I don’t see, for instance, why a Subsequent 37 is cheaper than the new Minimoog reissue? Yeah, one less oscillator I guess 😀

I even press two keys with one fingers sometimes. Not kidding, I’m serious! Like the following voicing of Am7/11, bottom to top: Left hand: A E B Right hand: (C D) G A B D The C and D in the parentheses are both pressed by my right thumb. I hear you saying that’s a lot of repeating tones but just try the Lyle Mays-ey sizzle you get from the thick voicing in the upper part, especially the doubled 11th and 9th to accentuate these extensions more 😉 It requires 9 voices. P.S. one can even play it like: Left hand: A E (B C) Right hand: (D E) G A B D for even thicker 10-voiced madness 😀 Sometimes even 8-voices require double-keyed thumb voicing, e.g. F#m7/11 due to black and white keys and inability to stretch fingers: Left hand: F# C# G# Right hand: (A B) E G# B

I purchased a B-Stock YC73 that I thought had a slight problem, so I returned it but there was no replacement YC73 and so I had to decide between a YC88 and a CP88 that were the only available stock. For me it was a rather easy decision: I am not a Hammond player and I found it a bit awkward to play organ sounds through a hammer action and I consider myself a very hardcore classical pianist. Then, there's the great summary @AnotherScott posted. While I had the YC I found it a bit confusing to have to switch between Keys A and B on the same panel. Also, the effect abbreviations were too cryptic to me and I couldn't remember what was what. I really like how on the CP I have three separate sections for piano/epiano/others, each with a set of effects that are readable and relevant to the particular section. I miss the FM-synth with portamento though but OTOH I have a separate synth as a second board and I prefer playing synths on synth keys. I'm pretty happy with the CP88 and I saved some money too.

My initial reaction was of course huge GAS. Then I saw the price at Thomann: €4000. It’s an OK price for a high quality instrument that is basically a Memorymoog and is made by Sequential. I really would love having one! But then, frankly speaking, I already have it: U-He Diva 😀 And a Hydrasynth 😛 Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know! But still… 🧐

I purchased my Behringer Model D for €250 brand new. Why would I sell it? I would just throw it away if it fails. Doing great for two years now. I’m not dismissing the reissue but at 20 times the price of a Behringer Model D, it’s certainly a niche product for connoisseurs.

Wow, that's great! I started reading the Sequential page and managed to reach the middle of the first sentence: "The Trigon-6 is Sequential’s polyphonic take on the classic, thick and creamy, 3-oscillator-plus-ladder-filter analog sound..." At which point I stopped and screamed: Shut up and take my money! ❤️

I have programmed aftertouch to open the filter and apply vibrato (including vibrato rate increase). Then with the pitch bend I open the filter even further, so it's like I apply the base line brightness of the filter through the pitch bend and then fine-modulate the filter through aftertouch. And the mod wheel is for wave-shaping. I could've used an expression pedal instead but my "studio" is in our bedroom which is why I try to keep it tidy and everything is in some boxes, so lately I just don't bother using pedals and the likes... 😢 I really need a dedicated space for making music. I started with a very typical love/hate relation but after two years it's mostly love now 😀I still have these occasional moments where I say "meh, that sucks, what a silly digital synth!" but those are much rarer than the regular joy I get from it. Then, I find something to hate about anything in life, so the problem might not even be with the Hydra 🤦🏻‍♂️

Well, this is trivial: because I am using both the pitch bend and modulation for different things (the pitch bend does a global filter cutoff control + volume, whereas the mod wheel changes the shape from narrow pulse towards square). Since they are next to each other it is easy to control them together which is what I do but I would have loved to have two mod wheels as on an OB rather than one self-centering pitch bend wheel... Well, here's some geeky stuff I learned on the ASM Facebook group: if you use the Phazdiff mutant with a saw wave, then that would actually result in a pulse wave with different width depending on the amount but what is more important, the way Phazdiff mutant works is without introducing clicking artifacts (why - because phase diff subtracts an inverted signal with a phase difference from the main signal. If you draw it on a paper to visualize it, a saw wave + another saw wave that is inverted and with different phase and subtract one from another, it would indeed result in a pulse wave. The good news is you can start calculating the result within the same cycle hence no need for buffering and no artifacts/clicking). For the life of me I wouldn't have thought that to produce proper pulse waves with different width I should use a saw with PhazDiff rather than the most obvious square + PWM Orig. But there's a catch: for some reason it doesn't sound exactly like what I was seeking for, although the clicking is eliminated. I suggested to ASM to just provide 10-20 new precooked waves such as 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%... pulse. Anyway, I love the Hydra and I haven't bought it to emulate Moogs 😀 As a matter of fact it's great at emulating Moogs. But not everything.

I have some recent stuff for this thread, although I'm not sure how many people would really be interested, but hey, it's on-topic and I'm the author of the thread, so why not 😀 In a recent thread @Tuskerasked if someone has combined a synth to a piano. The idea entered my head and I coincidentally discovered a Tchaikovsky song for soprano and piano and so I decided to overdub myself and play the voice part on a synth. My Behringer Model D had been sitting dusty for at least a year, which is why it was my choice. I turned it on and luckily what I last dialed on it a year ago was perfect: a single oscillator with the shortest pulse (rightmost position) and a slight filter envelope. But it's the typical unmistakable Moog sound that reminds oboe/clarinet/flute. I connected my Hydrasynth via MIDI but also programmed the aftertouch to send control voltage output to open the filter and increase the modulation (vibrato), as well as the ribbon to act as a volume control (a silly idea but I was in a hurry and didn't know where my expression pedal was in the mess). It turned out very expressive: I liked the result a lot. Do you? Anyway, I decided to try to recreate that patch on the Hydrasynth itself because I've always said on this forum how the Hydra can do any synth and especially a Moog should be e piece of cake, right. Well, wrong! I lost hours trying to recreate the same patch 100%. Turns out there's a big omission on the Hydrasynth. There are only 3 pulse waves with narrow width but none sounded like what I was looking for. So, I then used a square wave and the "PWM Orig" mutant which is exactly what is needed, right? Well, not exactly 😉 While I was able to approach the patch pretty close, it wasn't exactly the same, no matter what but what is more important: on fast legato playing there was some clicking between notes. And no, it's not the "fast digital attack/release", I know what I'm doing and it's not that. It turned out the problem is just the way mutants work. They need to buffer the incoming oscillator wave, so that they can apply the DSP that shortens the pulse width but that causes clicks. It was confirmed by Glen Darcey on the ASM Facebook group. And here's where this thread comes to mind again. The Hydrasynth is great and is my favorite synth but it just does the PWM in a rather over-engineered way. I don't need actual pulse width modulation. I need a fixed width. But they don't give you lots of fixed pulse widths, instead they give you 2-3 of them and the rest is you using a square wave going through a PWM mutant which is just too awkward for such a simple need. Here's a short video that I recorded to demonstrate the Hydra PWM artifact, I'm switching between Model D and Hydrasynth, see the captions: So, I was rather disappointed with the Hydrasynth at that point. I like it for what it is, but in the context of this thread, it's not the perfect Virtual Vintage Analog synth 😢 Well, yes, it's not marketed as such but still... And then I decided to recreate the same patch on my favorite Virtual VIntage Analog synth, the U-He Diva. Well, I spent more than 30 minutes to nail it down but it became 100% the same! I love Diva, I don't know of any better software! I didn't record any direct comparison between the Model D and Diva unfortunately, however I recorded an entirely new piano and synth video, a Romance for horn and piano by Scriabin where I play the horn part with the Diva patch in question. OK, I upped it a but by adding shape modulation through the mod wheel and additional filter control through the pitch bend (no actual pitch change, only filter mod), so take it as it is, but you should trust me: Diva is simply fantastic! 😀 Here's the Scriabin video:

I believe most players would intuitively learn where the pedal region is and would work there, most probably not lifting or pressing the pedal fully, often staying within the half-pedal region. At least I do that, it’s an aural feedback that’s almost unconscious/internalized IMO.

^ This is called re-pedaling. Half-pedaling is somehow related but not exactly. On a real piano the dampers are not instantaneous, they can’t stop the string vibration immediately, especially in the bass region. Which is why releasing the pedal while the strings are producing loud sound and then quickly pressing it again (hence lifting the dampers off the string) would have the effect of only slightly dampening the sound without stopping it fully, which naturally is dependent on your timing. If you’re quick enough, you can repeatedly press and release the pedal multiple time until the sound is dampened. Again, that’s called re-pedaling and I’ve personally complained about the lack of it in many sampled piano libraries on the computer. Digital pianos support it almost universally. It’s the first time I see someone not liking it though. In combination with half-pedaling it helps in shaping your sustain and phrasing, especially in classical romantic repertoire and lyrical legato-driven pieces.

I lived long enough to see someone complaining about long piano sustain (using a Casio digital piano as a reference) and complaining about presence of re-pedaling 😲

Ahh, right, I totally forgot they ship to the US too. I thought the question was from a European customer's perspective.