Search:
Submit Search


sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Existing and forthcoming Hauptwerk instruments, recommendations, ...

sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby hsiegers » Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:18 pm

Hello all,

Weather to buy the second volume from the Hinz I have listened quite some time to the demos on the Milan site,
I hear a exeptional difference between volume 1 (very realistic) and the added volume 2 and 3 (less realistic).
Are the recordings made in equal temperament for volume 2 + 3 or what else is the matter?
Am I too critical?
No personal thing Brett, I am just curious!

Harm
hsiegers
Member
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 5:38 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby Opus138 » Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:27 pm

Good day everybody,

Yes, I share this feeling, and also another user in my village. Volume 1 as compared to volume 3 is more brilliant, more natural, whereas volume 3 gives me an artificial, somewhat electronic impression. Question is: what causes that idea? Is it the reverb that adds up with so many more voices in volume 3?

Simon Heijkoop
Opus138
Member
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:24 am
Location: Netherlands, Capelle a/d IJssel

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby B. Milan » Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:58 pm

Hello,

The only real differences between volumes 2+3 to volume 1 (besides having more samples of course) was the wind model settings which were tightened up as many users commented about the volume 1 wind model being a bit too flexible in pitch etc. All sample recordings from all 3 volumes were done at the same time with the same microphone positions, so the samples blend as they would in real life.

The divisions in volume 2+3 were closer to the microphones since the placement of those divisions are closer in the casework. The Hoofdwerk is the bulk of the sound for volume 1 which has a more distant sound. Perhaps you are hearing the more present divisions in volume 2+3 and comparing it to the Hoofdwerk? At any rate, there are no settings that would detract from the organ other than the different wind model settings and the presence of the pipes in volumes 2+3. If it is the wind system settings you are hearing you may always raise the percentages of the wind model to achieve the effects a bit more extremely as they were in volume 1.

I hope that helps.
Regards,
Brett Milan
http://www.hauptwerk.com
http://www.milandigitalaudio.com
Send Email

Image

_________________________________
Please use email for contacting us. No private messages please.
User avatar
B. Milan
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4294
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 11:15 am
Location: Tampa, FL. USA

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby engrssc » Mon Feb 22, 2010 7:45 pm

The only real differences between volumes 2+3 to volume 1 (besides having more samples of course) was the wind model settings which were tightened up as many users commented about the volume 1 wind model being a bit too flexible in pitch etc.


Assume that wouldn't apply to those of us in the USA that don't have the "pleasure" of having the wind modeling option, correct?

Not to step on a sore toe, but is there a chance that will ever change? :cry:

Rgds,
Ed
User avatar
engrssc
Member
 
Posts: 4822
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 11:12 pm
Location: Roscoe, IL, USA

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby imcg110 » Tue Feb 23, 2010 5:24 am

Having recently upgraded from Vol1 to vol 2/3 I can say that I am very happy with the organ. Vol 1 has an intermediate presence due to postition of pipework. Vol 2/3 gives the rest of the spread from close to far away sound. The pedal can be wooly, but this seems to be a characteristic of the organ rather than the sample set, and with careful registration, is not a problem in practise. It is a huge and complex organ though!! Firstly it takes some time to get to know all it's characteristics and use them to best advantage. Secondly, It sounds best using multi channel audio, a single stereo mixdown doesn't really do justice to the majesty of the sound. The quality of sampling is very good - but it is a "best seat in the house" sound rather than an "at the console" sound. Despite the cavernous acoustic (? the biggest in hauptwerk?), the organ comes with you when playing fast - the touch is very reponsive - the multi release sampling works well here. The response is even better with the wind modelling turned off!! Perhaps not the ideal organ to learn a piece from scratch, but huge fun to play with familiar music. I find it one of the most natural sounding instruments in my library.
User avatar
imcg110
Member
 
Posts: 830
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 6:25 am
Location: Scotland

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby RoyKnight » Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:46 am

Having recently upgraded from Vol1 to vol 2/3 I can say that I am very happy with the organ. Vol 1 has an intermediate presence due to postition of pipework. Vol 2/3 gives the rest of the spread from close to far away sound. The pedal can be wooly, but this seems to be a characteristic of the organ rather than the sample set, and with careful registration, is not a problem in practise. It is a huge and complex organ though!! Firstly it takes some time to get to know all it's characteristics and use them to best advantage. Secondly, It sounds best using multi channel audio, a single stereo mixdown doesn't really do justice to the majesty of the sound. The quality of sampling is very good - but it is a "best seat in the house" sound rather than an "at the console" sound. Despite the cavernous acoustic (? the biggest in hauptwerk?), the organ comes with you when playing fast - the touch is very reponsive - the multi release sampling works well here. The response is even better with the wind modelling turned off!! Perhaps not the ideal organ to learn a piece from scratch, but huge fun to play with familiar music. I find it one of the most natural sounding instruments in my library.


Ian,

My exact sentiments about the Hinsz, but you stated it so much more eloquently than I could! Of course the wind modeling is always off for me since I live in the US! It really is a super sample set, that becomes more enjoyable each time I play it!

Roy
"Practice makes permanent"
RoyKnight
Member
 
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 5:46 pm
Location: Grafton, WV

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby Grant_Youngman » Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:00 pm

engrssc wrote:[
Not to step on a sore toe, but is there a chance that will ever change? :cry:

Rgds,
Ed


I hope I live that long :?

I was listening to some very nice Cappell recordings on Contrebombarde the other day. Sounded so much different and more "living" than the Cappell sample set I have in my living room. Finally realized that "it's the wind model, stupid" It's really too bad for US users.

I suppose I need to add a villa in Umbria or an apartment in the Netherlands to my Hauptwerk budget :wink:
Grant
User avatar
Grant_Youngman
Member
 
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:50 pm
Location: Savannah, Ga

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby engrssc » Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:27 pm

Sounded so much different and more "living" than the Cappell sample set I have in my living room. Finally realized that "it's the wind model, stupid" It's really too bad for US users.

I suppose I need to add a villa in Umbria or an apartment in the Netherlands to my Hauptwerk budget :wink:


Hi Grant,

I and probably you, too, know about the "patent" issue. I also know Martin and Brett really don't want to discuss it, but, I did mention such to a patent attorney some time ago, (while discussing something completely different). He, matter of fact, responded, all patent rights can be purchased, it's just that the patent holder wants his/her "fair share".

And I'm sure many have noticed the difference as to "with and without".

Rgds,
Ed
User avatar
engrssc
Member
 
Posts: 4822
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 11:12 pm
Location: Roscoe, IL, USA

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby hsiegers » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:43 pm

Hello all, Simon as well,

I am glad to see that I am not the only one who hear a major difference in those added volumes from the Hinz organ.
In the further comment is spoken of a wind model changing or the abcence of that.
Folks: I have the basic version of Hauptwerk so for me no windmodel also.
Further: if they hear the organ 'live" in its glory it is a rather different sound than the full sample set.
I compare the real organsound and ambiance with the sound and ambiance of the sample set.
Volume 1 has a perfect sound and ambiance, volume 2 and 3 have less.

Brett causes the difference to the adjusted windmodel and the pipework nearer to the microphones.
This is correct for the Rugwerk, it is low positioned and more directly recorded.
This is not the issue by volume 3: the Bovenwerk 1 is above in the organ, on top of the Hoofdwerk.
I can understand it gives a part of the explanation (I mentioned it before, Brett will know it) but that is not where I aiming at.

On U-tube is a very interesting video to see: a recording Hinz sample set with added reverb (with Ambiance).
Everybody can hear the major difference: with reverb added the sound is fantastic real.
This is exactly what I miss now in the added Volume 2+3.

Or are the recordings on the Milan site made in equal temperament??
When I set it to Volume 1 I get nearly the same soundeffect.

Hear from you,

Harm
hsiegers
Member
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 5:38 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby RoyKnight » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:58 pm

On U-tube is a very interesting video to see: a recording Hinz sample set with added reverb (with Ambiance).
Everybody can hear the major difference: with reverb added the sound is fantastic real.


Hi Harm,

I watched that video on YouTube and I found it very interesting. My system is set up to use external reverb through a surround setup, for several dry sample sets I have. I thought it strange that "adding" reverb to a very wet sample would make it muddy and inarticulate. But I tried it, applying some additional reverb in the surround system, and it significantly changed the effect. The room seemed to expand, and the instrument became warmer sounding, and it doesn't seem to muddy the effect at all. If you have access to additional reverb, you might want to try it. Of course, I have never heard the real organ except for recordings and videos (I own a few DVDs of the concerts at the bovenkerk) You are right, even on recordings, the acoustics of the church are indescribably wonderful!

Roy
"Practice makes permanent"
RoyKnight
Member
 
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 5:46 pm
Location: Grafton, WV

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby hsiegers » Tue Feb 23, 2010 5:16 pm

Hello Roy,

The point you mentioned is exactly what I ment to say.
I have been often to concerts and played it myself, it was a dream come thrue.
I give a huge compliment to Brett and his team to create a perfect sample set as Hinz Volume 1 is.

Maybe a reverb module built in Hauptwerk (version 4) can give every sample set some more ambiance.

Regards, Harm
hsiegers
Member
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 5:38 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby B. Milan » Tue Feb 23, 2010 6:14 pm

Or are the recordings on the Milan site made in equal temperament??


All of the web demos use the original organ tuning with the exception of those recorded by Ab Weegenaar which use equal temperament.
Regards,
Brett Milan
http://www.hauptwerk.com
http://www.milandigitalaudio.com
Send Email

Image

_________________________________
Please use email for contacting us. No private messages please.
User avatar
B. Milan
Site Admin
 
Posts: 4294
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 11:15 am
Location: Tampa, FL. USA

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby Eric Sagmuller » Tue Feb 23, 2010 7:39 pm

I have had volume 1 for some time and as my Audiofire 12 has been in the shop for over two months I haven't been able to play. Just before I sent the interface away to Echo I bought volumes 2 and 3, but I never got a chance to load them yet.

So you guys are saying that with volume 1 the sound is more lifelike, what happens when volumes 2 and 3 are loaded. Does that change the more lifelike existing sound of the stops in volume 1 also? Or is it only when volume 1 is loaded that the clarity of those stops is superior?

I have also listened to the demos and to me BWV565 in volume 1 is one of the most beautiful sounding recordings. It's that, that basically sold me on the Bovenkerk set. To me some of the later demos do appear to sound less lifelike too, but a have noticed this with a number of other sets too. Then once in a while I'll hear a performance of one of our talented plays using the same organ, and it sounds much more real again.

I wonder if there is some EQ or something going on that's taking some of the life out of some of the recordings. For instance listening to Wim Mager play Alle Roem on YouTube and then playing it here, there is a big difference in the glory of it. Of course I was only using volume 1, but this compared to listening on a cheap pair of computer speakers, with distortion on YouTube, the live performance still sounds more lifelike. I still also wonder if it has to do with the sounds mixing in air (YouTube) rather than electronically.

Thanks,
Eric
Eric Sagmuller
Member
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 5:18 pm
Location: Bellefonte, PA USA

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby stevebryson » Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:00 am

I can't resist jumping in here, even though I am completely unqualified to comment on the "realism" of the Bovenkirk. I purchased Vol I and II together, and III a few days later (along with more memory!), and I've sensed no difference in quality between the various stops. Even with the newer, much higher quality headphones that I bought last week. Yes, different stops have different presence and ambience, but this is what I'd expect from a reasonable listening position in a church, and is consistent with the various recordings I have.

What I really want to say is that I'm absolutely obsessed with the Bovenkirk. As I've told Brett privately, I spend much of my day thinking about what I'll do with it, and stay up way too late playing it :D . It's a fantastic instrument and I can't recommend it too highly. All of it.

Like Eric, I was greatly moved by Brett's recording of BWV565 in the Vol I demo section, and this alone is the reason I took the plunge and bought the Bovenkirk (as well as purchased Hauptwerk!).

Anyway, that's my relatively uninformed opinion. I may not know organs as well as many of you, but I know what I like :lol:

steve
stevebryson
Member
 
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 5:26 pm
Location: Corte Madera, California

Re: sound Hinz vol 2 + 3 comparing vol 1

Postby RoyKnight » Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:03 pm

Steve,

You are right! Bovenkerk has become one of my favorite organs to play, too. After playing quite a bit in this massive acoustic, you begin to adjust your attack, just as you would in playing in a new church with its inherent acoustics. Brett, do not receive my previous observations in this post as criticism of your hard work. It is a phenomenal sample set and I love it and thank you for it! There are some pieces I have heard on YouTube, especially the Psalms that don't satisfy me on any other instrument .

Roy
"Practice makes permanent"
RoyKnight
Member
 
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 5:46 pm
Location: Grafton, WV

Next

Return to Hauptwerk instruments

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests