> Their's no doubt that Pianoteq is pretty amazing by limited I meant that > they're only geared at one type of sound typically, emulating a Piano, > Organ, or Guitar etc. where as with FM, Additive, Subtractive, or Phase > Distortion you can't make a realistic sounding Piano or anything but you > can create a wide variety of sounds fairly easily
I see what you mean, but I wouldn't say that physical models are necessarily more limited. They are just "differently limited". Pianoteq's model appears to simulates steel drums, marimba, vibraphone, electrical pianos, pianos, harpsichord... and within pianos they do a pretty good job of simulating both modern instruments (bluethner, yamaha, steinway) and historical instruments (erard, pleyel, ...). Good physical models manage to make a vibrant, very life-like expressive sound. FM synthesized sounds often sound like "a cheap plastic version" of a real sound (and in that sense FM synthesis is more limited). E.g. if you overblow a flute model, you get the typical "overblown flute" sound, if you play piano strings you get interactions between the strings that influence the sound. These would probably be very hard to make with other methods (including sampling, since the required number of samples would be astronomically high). I do agree with you that convincing physical models are challenging to design and implement. But if anyone wants to give it a go, here's some background information: https://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/pubs.html His online books look very interesting. -- http://technogems.blogspot.com http://a-touch-of-music.blogspot.com http://youtube.com/stefaanhimpe ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Slashdot TV. Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters. http://tv.slashdot.org/ _______________________________________________ LMMS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
