Im Wesentlichen geb ich Dir Recht, liebe Aeoline,
Es bleibt aber dabei, dass die DO ein elektronisches Instrument und die PO ein Blasinstrument ist: Klangerzeugung UND Klangwiedergabe betreffend.
Wir allerdings bemühen uns zur Zeit immer noch um ein Imitat! Bleibt der Wunsch nach Orgeln aber weiterhin bestehen, so wird das Imitat zu einem "eigenständigen" elektronischen Instrument und verliert seinen "Nachahmungscharakter".
Rein theoretisch!

Harzlich
Orgelditi

Kann ich verstehen.

Die Zungenregister und der Hall sind bei Physis (+) die größten Schwachpunkte.

Ich erinnere mich da an die Aussage von Digital Pipes, der zurecht gesagt hatte, daß die Physis-Orgeln ihre Stärke in großen Räumen ausspielen, die keinen Hall benötigen, während die gesampleten eben für kleine Räume besser wären.

Ich bin auf den Accusphere Hall und die bessere Auflösung (v.a. im Obertonspektrum) gespannt, denn da kann man nochmal ordentlich Pluspunkte sammeln.

Zur bisherigen Physis-Orgel: Wenn ich das richtig mitbekommen habe, haben die Instrumente keine Hochtöner und die 3FE25 müssen die Höhen mit auffangen, was sie nicht so gut können wie eben Hochtöner. Zugleich habe ich das Gefühl, daß die Tiefen in kleinen Räumen dann zu präsent sind. Dementsprechend habe ich jetzt auch mal mit dem Equalizer etwas gegengesteuert und der Klang ist schon um einiges besser, wenn man romantische Orgeln abbilden will. Viele Mixturen sind leider neobarock und daher nach meiner Auffassung so schrill, daß die anderen Register es schwer haben, sich dagegen zu behaupten.

Physis (+) hätte eine gravierende Stärke gegenüber gesampleten Digitalorgen und sogar Pfeifenorgeln: Man könnte (unmögliche) neue Pfeifenformen und auch neue Registerzusammenstellungen ausprobieren. Solange aber das Erstellerprogramm im Labor verstaubt und nicht wenigstens der Editor für das bisherige Physis den Freaks zugänglich gemacht wird, bleibt eben auch das Potential brach liegen. Selbst bei dem bisherigen Physis wäre da noch viel zu heben...

Viele Grüße

Ippenstein

You are right, Andreas, about the potential of Physis (+) in a reverberant room. In fact, Physis is currently the most powerful engine for pipe-organ sound reproduction available on the market.
It even offers some advantages compared with pipe organs, because during voicing (on site), it is possible to choose the stops that are most appropriate for the specific situation. With pipe organs, the construction parameters of the pipes are fixed when the pipes are built. Voicing can certainly achieve a great deal, but the final sonic result is still, to some extent, a surprise (even for the organ builder).
With Physis, by contrast, one can follow an iterative process in which all stops are selected and voiced as part of the overall voicing process. In the end, one may discover that the beautiful flûte harmonique originally envisioned is not actually the most suitable stop for the job.
When Physis is used at home, however, we know that things change. In that case, we usually do not have a reverberant room and have to rely on artificial reverb. The built-in reverb engine is simply too weak. Period.
I have been testing, for a friend who owns a Sonus 60 and cannot deal with digital workstations, plugins, converters, and audio interfaces, a small but very effective external reverb unit: the Hotone Verbera. It is a standalone, easy-to-use convolution reverb that lets you load any IRs you want (24-bit/48 kHz). In this way, Physis can use the same reverb as Johannus and Sweelinq.
And last but not least, the default voicing is not that good (nothing new here) so that also plays a role.

Der Raum bleibt das wichtigste Register der Orgel.

Schon vor 50 Jahren klangen Ahlborn Röhrenorgeln und die ersten Allen "Digital"-Modelle in einem guten Raum recht beeindruckend - und würden so auch heute noch als befriedigend klingend eingeordnet! Vorausgesetzt, dass die Verstärker für den Raum dimensioniert sind.

Digitalorgeln in guter Akustik nur mit vier DIN A 2 großen Boxen erfahren nur wenig klangliche Verbesserung durch einen guten Raum.

Zitat von digitalpipes im Beitrag #21

---

You are right, Andreas, about the potential of Physis (+) in a reverberant room. In fact, Physis is currently the most powerful engine for pipe-organ sound reproduction available on the market.
It even offers some advantages compared with pipe organs, because during voicing (on site), it is possible to choose the stops that are most appropriate for the specific situation. With pipe organs, the construction parameters of the pipes are fixed when the pipes are built. Voicing can certainly achieve a great deal, but the final sonic result is still, to some extent, a surprise (even for the organ builder).
With Physis, by contrast, one can follow an iterative process in which all stops are selected and voiced as part of the overall voicing process. In the end, one may discover that the beautiful flûte harmonique originally envisioned is not actually the most suitable stop for the job.
When Physis is used at home, however, we know that things change. In that case, we usually do not have a reverberant room and have to rely on artificial reverb. The built-in reverb engine is simply too weak. Period.
I have been testing, for a friend who owns a Sonus 60 and cannot deal with digital workstations, plugins, converters, and audio interfaces, a small but very effective external reverb unit: the Hotone Verbera. It is a standalone, easy-to-use convolution reverb that lets you load any IRs you want (24-bit/48 kHz). In this way, Physis can use the same reverb as Johannus and Sweelinq.
And last but not least, the default voicing is not that good (nothing new here) so that also plays a role.

---

off topic:
Hi Paolo! Welcome back!

Zitat von digitalpipes im Beitrag #21

---

I have been testing, for a friend who owns a Sonus 60 and cannot deal with digital workstations, plugins, converters, and audio interfaces, a small but very effective external reverb unit: the Hotone Verbera. It is a standalone, easy-to-use convolution reverb that lets you load any IRs you want (24-bit/48 kHz). In this way, Physis can use the same reverb as Johannus and Sweelinq.

---

Hello @digitalpipes ,

As far as I understand the impulse responses are used to make the audio plus the reverb sounding similar like in a real room or cathedral, where the IR has been recorded.
Do you know of any similar HW device which does not only produce a good reverb, but also can correct the room acoustics, especially in small rooms, i.e. nasty interferences, standing waves? There are sw-based systems which do a very similar thing as the IRs
A sine tone goes up and is recorded by a calibrated mic... Feeding such an information into a HW device, similar to the verbera, would be a very nice solution for a typical DO in a living room.
Do you know of such a device?

Regards,
Wolfgang

Hello Wolfgang,

yes, in principle Verbera can also be used for this purpose. It is a stereo convolution device, so it does not have to be limited to “reverb” IRs such as rooms, halls or cathedrals. It can also be loaded with correction impulse responses, for example FIR/convolution filters generated from room measurements.

One possible workflow would be to measure the room with software such as REW (Room EQ Wizard) using a calibrated measurement microphone, generate the desired correction filters, and export the corresponding impulse response as a WAV file. REW does support exporting impulse responses / filter impulse responses as WAV files, including responses with EQ filters applied (Verbera handles 24bit/48kHz files).

There are, however, a few important limitations.

First, Verbera is a stereo convolver. Therefore the system being corrected must be a stereo system. It would not be suitable as a general room-correction processor for a multichannel surround setup.

Second, Verbera can handle only one impulse response at a time. So it has to be used either as a convolution reverb, loaded with a room/hall/cathedral IR, or as a room-correction processor, loaded with a correction IR. It cannot do both simultaneously unless the reverb and correction were somehow pre-combined into a single IR, which is usually not the normal use case.

Third, room correction should not be understood as a cure for the room itself. Equalisation can help to reduce certain frequency-response problems at the listening position, especially modal peaks. But it cannot remove standing waves from the room, and it usually cannot fix deep cancellation nulls caused by destructive interference. Those issues are better addressed with speaker/listener placement, bass trapping and acoustic treatment. DSP can be very useful, but it cannot change the underlying acoustics of the room.

So the answer is: yes, Verbera can potentially be used with room-correction IRs, provided the correction is prepared as a suitable stereo convolution file and the application is a stereo system rather than surround. In that case, however, Verbera would be used for room correction rather than as a reverb unit.

Zitat von Aeoline im Beitrag #15

---

Ich kann meine Meinung leider nicht wissenschaftlich untermauern - dazu fehlen mir die Kenntnisse aus der Akustik und der Lautsprechertechnik...

Ich glaube, dass es weniger an der Klangerzeugung denn an der Klangwiedergabe liegt.

Gerade im häuslichen Orgelzimmer müssen die Lautsprecher nicht nur den eigentlichen Orgelklang wiedergeben, sondern auch meist den "Raum" ersetzen - der ja nicht ganz unwichtig ist...

Ein lüddes "Gedeckt 8" auf einer PO hat 60 "Lautsprecher". Wir quälen ein Plenum aus 40+x Register über vielleicht 10 Lautsprecher. Selbst bei einer großzügigen externen Abstrahlung sind es vielleicht 30 oder mehr...

Ein HiFi-Freak hat mir mal gesagt, dass man 50% der Kosten für eine Anlage in die Lautsprecher stecken sollte. Wenn man das auf die Preise von aktuellen DO umlegt... [nachdenken]

VG
Aeoline

---

Zitat von digitalpipes im Beitrag #27

---

... So the answer is: yes, Verbera can potentially be used with room-correction IRs, provided the correction is prepared as a suitable stereo convolution file and the application is a stereo system rather than surround. In that case, however, Verbera would be used for room correction rather than as a reverb unit.

---

Zitat von Windlade im Beitrag #29

---

Thanks a lot for your detailed and comprehensive explanation. I can understand the topic better now. Using four channels in my setup, I would need a "bigger" solution.

Regards
Wolfgang

---