New Studiologic Numa X Piano

[CyberGene]

P.S. actually you spoke about release velocity too. I got it wrong initially. Apologies 

[DeltaJockey]

9 minutes ago, CyberGene said:

@DeltaJockey the question is about Note-Off values (release velocity), not Note-On (strike velocity). The release velocity is helpful in achieving piano realism because it will affect the release portion of the sound (the tail) depending on whether you released quickly (following a staccato) or slowly for smoother transitions between notes in a phrase. These are subtle effects that may go unnoticed and utilized more in solo classical piano but are nevertheless part of a good piano emulation. 

Yes, I understand this, I think I'm not articulating my words well today. 🤔......In order to achieve my highest note off value numerically, I had to flick the key down and let go as hard as I could. (in an absolute staccato fashion. I found that if I hold the key down, then letting go hard was not enough to achieve a value of 127. Probably my own technique was the problem, but that is immaterial to what I was trying to achieve.

[CyberGene]

Just now, DeltaJockey said:

I found that if I hold the key down, then letting go hard was not enough to achieve a value of 127

Makes sense, indeed I misinterpreted your words.

 

Kudos to Studiologic to actively work on delivering new features and sensor detection logic (even though it should have been there since the beginning but then, how many times did the big names fix known issues in their products?). 

[DeltaJockey]

Just now, CyberGene said:

Makes sense, indeed I misinterpreted your words.

 

Kudos to Studiologic to actively work on delivering new features and sensor detection logic (even though it should have been there since the beginning but then, how many times did the big names fix known issues in their products?). 

I think there's some psychological benefit in feeding us periodic improvements over time rather than giving us perfection from the start!

[AnotherScott]

7 hours ago, DeltaJockey said:

I can also confirm that not only the Kronos, but my Korg Keystage also transmits only 0 - 64. I think it must be standard for Korg to only output a compressed range of release velocity values. I cans see their logic in designing it this way, but for many other sound source expressions, it is nice to have the full range.

Interesting about the Korgs. I mentioned that I think the EPs in SV1 and Grandstage play especially well because of release velocity, and related to that, it has been problematic when I wanted to trigger their sounds from some other board. If that other board sent a constant 64 RV, you'd get way too much release noise when playing quietly (and from what you're saying, that 64 actually equates to the max level!), and I assume if it sent zero, you wouldn't get those noises at all.

 

I wonder what happens if you attach a controller like Numa X which send up to 127 to one of those Korgs. I expect you'd get "full volume" release noise at half the max release velocity (64), but that may or may not mean it sounds noticeably off ("too much too soon"), and similarly, I wonder what the Korg does when you send it release velocities 65-127. (i.e. are the all interpreted as the same as the max level of 64, or are they ignored and essentially turn into zero, or does the Korg start generating the sounds at louder levels than you could ever get from its own keys?)

 

It's not a totally academic question ("why not just play those boards from their own keys?")... I sometimes play a board's sounds from a different keyboard just for logistic/ergonomic reasons (i.e. based on where my various boards are physically located relative to each other). And a topic for another thread... I've been experimenting with turning Grandstage into a module! But worst case, something like a MIDI Solutions box (or some app) could presumably scale the Numa's 0-127 (14-127, whatever 🙂 ) to 0-64.

 

 

 

 

[DeltaJockey]

2 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

Interesting about the Korgs. I mentioned that I think the EPs in SV1 and Grandstage play especially well because of release velocity, and related to that, it has been problematic when I wanted to trigger their sounds from some other board. If that other board sent a constant 64 RV, you'd get way too much release noise when playing quietly (and from what you're saying, that 64 actually equates to the max level!), and I assume if it sent zero, you wouldn't get those noises at all.

........That's how I would expect it to behave too.

 

I wonder what happens if you attach a controller like Numa X which send up to 127 to one of those Korgs. I expect you'd get "full volume" release noise at half the max release velocity (64), but that may or may not mean it sounds noticeably off ("too much too soon"), and similarly, I wonder what the Korg does when you send it release velocities 65-127. (i.e. are the all interpreted as the same as the max level of 64, or are they ignored and essentially turn into zero, or does the Korg start generating the sounds at louder levels than you could ever get from its own keys?)

.......From my experience I think anything from 64 onwards would equate to a max of 64. I have a foot controller with a potentiometer adjuster where you can compress the range to suit. I find it useful when using it to control the expression on orchestral libraries, in parallel with the Mod wheel. It allows much shallower expression ranges to suit the libraries.

 

It's not a totally academic question ("why not just play those boards from their own keys?")... I sometimes play a board's sounds from a different keyboard just for logistic/ergonomic reasons (i.e. based on where my various boards are physically located relative to each other). And a topic for another thread... I've been experimenting with turning Grandstage into a module! But worst case, something like a MIDI Solutions box (or some app) could presumably scale the Numa's 0-127 (14-127, whatever 🙂 ) to 0-64.

...I use the modifier function in Logic to scale and offset controller inputs between controller and vst's. I don't think this use case would be that uncommon. I haven't had the need, but think I could use the Logic function between 2 hardware synths if need be.

 

 

 

 

 

[AnotherScott]

There's scattered conversation in the thread comparing the Numa X to the Yamaha CP73. I assembled what I think are the main differences other than sound and feel.

 

Numa X advantages:

... aftertouch

... front panel volumes for external MIDI zones

... about 3 lbs lighter
... can split layer 4 internal sounds each with their own key ranges (vs. 3 internal sounds, sharing a single split point)

... release velocity

... cheaper

... 4 input audio mixer

... adjustable filter cutoff/resonance

... ? I think it may have an advantage in seamless switching among sounds within a program

 

CP advantages:

... built-in power supply

... more hand-on/immediate interface, i.e. for manipulating splits/layers and effects

... mono mode with portamento

 

Comments? Things I missed?

 

 

[Noah DC]

I’d emphasize that the Numa X isn’t just slightly cheaper. The cost of two Numa X 73s is only around 150 dollars more than the cost of one CP73.
 

After looking into it when I was considering both boards, I am skeptical that the CP73 has anywhere close to the same audio interface/audio in capacity. On the Numa, you can seamlessly integrate into the on-board sounds multiple audio signals and MIDI devices (in addition to merged MIDI DIN devices). I use this all the time in my live performance - the other night I had an Alesis Keytar controller and Ocean Beach drawbars running Model D and VB3, respectively, off an iPad Air, all run only through the Numa. Changing volume, on/off settings, MIDI channels, etc. doesn’t require doing almost anything different than changing on-board patches does. On the CP73, you use a single knob in the back of the board that, as I understand it, can only be assigned to either USB audio or audio in. 

I also don’t see how manipulating effects could be any more hands-on or immediate than it is on the Numa - I just punch and/or turn a knob. But I haven’t used the CP73 effects so I can’t speak to the comparison. 

[Stefan011]

Ex Numa X 73 and current CP73 owner here.

 

I really loved Numa interface and connectivity. No problemms there.

 

Yamaha is better built but Numa is Lighter and better to carry. Also Yamaha has sloghtli better keybed but Numa is pretty much ok.

 

NNuma has great price and good form factor. Probllem was I play mostly EPs and despite the good reputation Numa has, the sound just disappeared in the band context. I dont know what was the reason. Lack of harmonic freq? DA converter? Bad EQ? Not compatible with my speakers? 

 

I got CP73 used for a great price and while it is not my preffered instrument (I like Nord and Kurzweil sounds more) it gets the job done. That said I hope Numa can improve with firmware, the concept and form factor is great.

[TomKittel]

1 hour ago, Stefan011 said:

Ex Numa X 73 and current CP73 owner here.

 

I really loved Numa interface and connectivity. No problemms there.

 

Yamaha is better built but Numa is Lighter and better to carry. Also Yamaha has sloghtli better keybed but Numa is pretty much ok.

 

NNuma has great price and good form factor. Probllem was I play mostly EPs and despite the good reputation Numa has, the sound just disappeared in the band context. I dont know what was the reason. Lack of harmonic freq? DA converter? Bad EQ? Not compatible with my speakers? 

 

I got CP73 used for a great price and while it is not my preffered instrument (I like Nord and Kurzweil sounds more) it gets the job done. That said I hope Numa can improve with firmware, the concept and form factor is great.

 

The latest update did not only significantly improve the AP sound but also the EPs. I play the YC61 EPs with the Numa keyboard sometimes. Can’t say which EPs are „better“. But the Numa EPs sound more authentic to my ears, especially with the Numa’s virtual EP engine and it’s sound shaping possibilities. 

[Stefan011]

41 minutes ago, TomKittel said:

 

The latest update did not only significantly improve the AP sound but also the EPs. I play the YC61 EPs with the Numa keyboard sometimes. Can’t say which EPs are „better“. But the Numa EPs sound more authentic to my ears, especially with the Numa’s virtual EP engine and it’s sound shaping possibilities. 

Interesting. YC and CP have the same EPs. Sometimes I would like to try Numa again and make direct comparsion. But to my ears Yamaha sits much better in the mix. Or it can be interaction between the amp, playing style and sound preference.

[voxpops]

4 hours ago, Stefan011 said:

Interesting. YC and CP have the same EPs. Sometimes I would like to try Numa again and make direct comparsion. But to my ears Yamaha sits much better in the mix. Or it can be interaction between the amp, playing style and sound preference.

 

The Numa X is becoming a very capable instrument, particularly in an exposed setting where its modeled components can be appreciated. But the "cleaner" Yamaha sound may well work better in a band context, unless the Numa sounds are adjusted specifically for that situation.

 

One other area where the Yamaha CP is pulling ahead is in its recently added portamento and mono mode. I believe most competing models from Roland, Korg, Kurzweil and Yamaha (and even Studiologic's own Numa Compact X SE) offer better synth control, whether sampled or VA. I think a lot of people playing more rock-oriented music would appreciate the addition of portamento. I had also hoped that Studiologic would have addressed the small issue when using the Italian grand with a half-damper pedal (a group of notes above middle C damp well before the rest), but hopefully both these minor irritations can be sorted out by the next update.

[counterpoint]

Scott...yes, the Numa X has aftertouch, but it is limited only to vibrato that has no adjustable parameters.  Yes, the Numa X has adjustable filter and resonance options for non-acoustic/EP voices/samples, but the implementation (frustratingly) varies widely as to the that those parameters can be applied to various samples.  I say this without meaning to leave the impression I am at all unhappy with the Numa.  As is often said here, no keyboard is "perfect"...especially when we all define perfection differently.

 

I have the YC 61 and before the Numa came out was thinking about pairing it with a CP or Nord Piano.  I wanted a 73 key triple sensor weighted action and (another) USB audio opportunity (CP and Nord Piano both have 2 out of 3) so the Numa threaded the needle (also CP would have also had a ton of overlap with the YC and the Nord Piano was/is, well, ridiculously expensive). 

 

As to what sounds "better" in what context, that is very subjective, and I think our ears are prejudiced to some extent by the narratives that are floated in that respect. That said, clearly the Numa and YC tackle sound generation and manipulation very differently...which is good in terms of providing a wider variety of options.  For example, I am playing a cocktail reception gig this weekend with a saxophonist this weekend where I'll be playing mostly acoustic piano sounds.  While I think the YC would get me through it admirably (setting aside my playing capabilities), it was an easy choice just to use the Numa for the weighted action.  The new (unofficially released) Studio D made the choice even easier.  It's different from anything on the YC and is very high quality...I am sure will come across quite well.  On paper at least, having the fuller, richer sound that the adjustable string and duplex resonance features provide will be more noticeable and functional in that small ensemble arrangement.  It probably wouldn't make as much of a difference in a larger and louder ensemble.  The Numa also allows adjustments to be made to some EP elements that the YC/CP don't like hammer intensity, tine offset and ambient sound loudness...not as extensive as most software but certainly more than the comparable hardware options.  Different strokes for different folks but an embarrassment of riches for us all...

 

 

[AnotherScott]

 

32 minutes ago, counterpoint said:

Scott...yes, the Numa X has aftertouch, but it is limited only to vibrato that has no adjustable parameters.

Reminds me of how the Nord Stage 3 had a dedicated vibrato aftertouch control, which had two speeds... one better for acoustic instruments, one better for synth sounds... but the problem was that it was a global setting, so you couldn't assign the slower one to your acoustic sounds and the faster one to your synth sounds. I believe that's no longer an issue on the NS4. At any "rate," as someone else said, it's most useful function in the Numa X might be when using the board as a controller (already one of the board's strengths), in which case AT becomes a lot more flexible.

 

32 minutes ago, counterpoint said:

I have the YC 61 and before the Numa came out was thinking about pairing it with a CP or Nord Piano.  I wanted a 73 key triple sensor weighted action and (another) USB audio opportunity (CP and Nord Piano both have 2 out of 3) so the Numa threaded the needle

A Numa X+YC61 combo does sound pretty nice. And with the recent update, it seems the triple sensor finally behaves the way people expect a triple sensor to behave!

[CrossRhodes]

Anyone know if there is somewhere in L.A. to check out the Numa X 88GT? I had reached out to Numa a while back but never got a response.

[HammondDave]

16 hours ago, CrossRhodes said:

Anyone know if there is somewhere in L.A. to check out the Numa X 88GT? I had reached out to Numa a while back but never got a response.

I have a NUMA X88 that you are welcome to stop by and play.  It is in the Valencia area.  

[Dockeys]

The Stage D piano is back up on Studiologic's website:

 

https://www.studiologic-music.com/blog/2024-09-13_nxp_stage_d/

 

[My Keys And Me Are Vintage]

It doesn't appear that anything was changed from the initial pre-release version. Same file sizes of 369,341 KB. 

[CyberGene]

2 hours ago, My Keys And Me Are Vintage said:

It doesn't appear that anything was changed from the initial pre-release version. Same file sizes of 369,341 KB.

Sometimes the file size is not enough to guarantee lack of changes, these are samples, so they can potentially take exactly the same space if the total samples duration hasn’t changed but the sample content can still be different, for instance changing the volume (normalizing) would affect the content  without changing the size. Only a checksum would guarantee the content is the same down to a single bit. 

[The_Star_Guy]

6 hours ago, Dockeys said:

The Stage D piano is back up on Studiologic's website:

 

https://www.studiologic-music.com/blog/2024-09-13_nxp_stage_d/

 

 

Grabbed it!   Thank you so much for the notification.  I will do both the OS v2.40 and this Acoustic Piano update this weekend!

[TomKittel]

 

[CyberGene]

The middle G key (above middle C) on the Stage D still has a clicky attack on one of the sample layers around mf. I reported it since the very beginning but it’s still not fixed. Other than that it’s an awesome piano, their best so far and by far 👏🏻

[CrossRhodes]

12 hours ago, HammondDave said:

I have a NUMA X88 that you are welcome to stop by and play.  It is in the Valencia area.  

 

Very kind of you, thanks! I'm on the westside so I would need to charter a plane. 😆

[CrossRhodes]

Man I wish I had been aware of the Numa before I bought my FP-90X. Roland would never in a million years keep offering free sound engine overhauls or new instruments without the customer needing to buy a new board or through selling expensive instrument packs (or even worse, trying to get you in on yet another money draining subscription model). Kudos to Studio Logic for doing things right. 

[TomKittel]

1 hour ago, CyberGene said:

The middle G key (above middle C) on the Stage D still has a clicky attack on one of the sample layers around mf. I reported it since the very beginning but it’s still not fixed. Other than that it’s an awesome piano, their best so far and by far 👏🏻

 

Did you find any sound differences in the “official” Stage D samples compared to the previous release? 

[kenheeter]

Sounds identical to me. I'm really enjoying my Numa X 73. I was considering selling it but I much prefer  playing it to  my Nord Stage 3 HP76.  The USB implementation and onboard mixer are also brilliant!  This thing, my Ipad and my D9X and I'm good to go!

 

[CyberGene]

11 minutes ago, TomKittel said:

Did you find any sound differences in the “official” Stage D samples compared to the previous release? 

Can’t say for sure, I haven’t compared them side by side, not even in the same day but I’d say besides that small blemish, I was impressed even with the first version, so even if they changed something in the official release, it’s subtle. 

[Kentkeys]

On 9/12/2024 at 3:15 PM, CrossRhodes said:

Anyone know if there is somewhere in L.A. to check out the Numa X 88GT? I had reached out to Numa a while back but never got a response.

YouTuber Piano Man Chuck sells Studiologic products and appears to be based in the LA area. He doesn’t seem to have retail premises but he may be prepared to arrange a demo - especially if it could lead to a potential sale!  He’s done a video on the Numa X GT.

[b3plyr]

Just started using the Stage D in my duo. What a great fit! No question it is a huge step forward for Studiologic!

[AnotherScott]

Okay, here's how the seamless transitions compare (at least for internal sounds), for Numa X vs. YC (and presumably CP). First some definitions: A Yamaha "Live Set" is a combination of up to 3 internal sounds (single split point), the similar Numa "Program" is a combination of up to 4 internal sounds (with individual keyboard ranges).

 

Yamaha has seamless transition between Live Sets (single transition only), Numa does NOT have seamless transition between Programs.

 

Yamaha does NOT have seamless transition among the three parts of a Live Set (i.e. turning off a Part immediately silences any held/sustaining notes), Numa DOES have seamless transition among the four parts of a Program.

 

Numa does NOT have seamless transition within a single part of a Program, Yamaha DOES permit seamless transition within a single part of a Live Set (e.g. you can seamlessly change from a Rhodes to a Wurly within that Part... single transition only). There is often a way to do something similar on the Numa, though. In this case, say you were playing a Rhodes using the first part, and you had the fourth part available. You could "silently" assign a Wurly to that 4th part on the fly, and then you would be able to do the seamless switching between parts 1 and 4.

 

I've only spoken about internal sounds here, I don't know whether either of these can seamlessly switch between external MIDI zones (I think it's unlikely, but maybe someone has tried this?).

 

On that topic, I listed earlier that the Numa has the advantage of having front panel volume controls for external MIDI zones. To be fair, I should also mention that the Numa external zones replace internal ones, whereas the Yamaha ones are additional to the internal ones. So a Numa Program contains up to 4 sounds total (any combination of internal and external), whereas a Yamaha Live Set can contain up to 7 sounds total (3 internal + 4 external). But the Numa external zones have the same on/off/voume immediacy as the internal zones, whereas the Yamaha external zones do not.