Goebl Werner, Bresin Roberto
Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence (OFAI), Freyung 6/6, 1010 Vienna, Austria.
J Acoust Soc Am. 2003 Oct;114(4 Pt 1):2273-83. doi: 10.1121/1.1605387.
The recording and reproducing capabilities of a Yamaha Disklavier grand piano and a Bösendorfer SE290 computer-controlled grand piano were tested, with the goal of examining their reliability for performance research. An experimental setup consisting of accelerometers and a calibrated microphone was used to capture key and hammer movements, as well as the acoustic signal. Five selected keys were played by pianists with two types of touch ("staccato" and "legato"). Timing and dynamic differences between the original performance, the corresponding MIDI file recorded by the computer-controlled pianos, and its reproduction were analyzed. The two devices performed quite differently with respect to timing and dynamic accuracy. The Disklavier's onset capturing was slightly more precise (+/- 10 ms) than its reproduction (-20 to +30 ms); the Bösendorfer performed generally better, but its timing accuracy was slightly less precise for recording (-10 to 3 ms) than for reproduction (+/- 2 ms). Both devices exhibited a systematic (linear) error in recording over time. In the dynamic dimension, the Bösendorfer showed higher consistency over the whole dynamic range, while the Disklavier performed well only in a wide middle range. Neither device was able to capture or reproduce different types of touch.
对雅马哈Disklavier三角钢琴和贝森朵夫SE290电脑控制三角钢琴的录制和再现能力进行了测试,目的是检验它们在表演研究中的可靠性。使用由加速度计和校准麦克风组成的实验装置来捕捉琴键和琴槌的运动以及声学信号。钢琴家以两种触键方式(“断奏”和“连奏”)弹奏五个选定的琴键。分析了原始表演、电脑控制钢琴录制的相应MIDI文件及其再现之间的时间和动态差异。这两种设备在时间和动态精度方面表现差异很大。Disklavier的起始捕捉比其再现(-20至+30毫秒)略精确(+/-10毫秒);贝森朵夫总体表现更好,但其录制时的时间精度(-10至3毫秒)比再现时(+/-2毫秒)略低。随着时间的推移,两种设备在录制过程中都表现出系统性(线性)误差。在动态维度上,贝森朵夫在整个动态范围内表现出更高的一致性,而Disklavier仅在较宽的中间范围内表现良好。两种设备都无法捕捉或再现不同类型的触键。