THE CARBON 212 PIANO/ PHOENIX-STEINGRABER 212
Hi all, back with another review of The Experience Pianos. This time I’m reviewing the Carbon 212, which samples a Steingraber-Phoenix.
The Steingraeber-Phoenix piano is, for all intents a purpose, a partnership between Phoenix Pianos and Steingraeber & Söhne. Steingraeber Was impressed with Phoenix’s work on restoring a Bosendorfer, and partnered with them. Using Steingraeber Pianos As a supplier for the case, frame, and body of the instrument, Phoenix implants their carbon fiber soundboard, stainless steel strings, and 3D-printed carbon actions, to create the new Steingraeber-Phoenix piano. The end result is a modernized take on the acoustic grand using more stable materials than wood for some of the most intricate parts.
I can’t speak to the science of it all, but I can speak to how it sounds, as it’s captured here.
Having listened to actual recording of this instrument, and the sampled version which is very faithful, I’ll say the Steingraeber-Phoenix 212 has a rather lovely tone.
Interestingly, I wouldn’t necessarily call it distinctive, but reminiscent of many things at once. A lot of Steinway, tempered by the fortissimo-shy characteristics of of a Fazioli, with some of the brightness of a Ravenscroft, some of the pluckiness of a Bechstein, some of the solidness of a Bosendorfer, and a bass somewhat reminiscent of a the overtones and timbres of a Bosendorfer but lacking the Bosendorfer warmth, color, and metallic wobble.
Not as perfectly balanced or colorful as a Steinway, not a unique or potentially problematic as a Bosendorfer, not as overly bright as a Fazioli, not as percussive and liminal as a Yamaha, not as timbre-limited as a Fazioli, not as metallically bright as a Ravenscroft. But bringing all of them to mind.
And also continuing some unique sonic artifacts, perhaps owing to it’s unique materials and construction.
It’s like If you took a Steinway, and mixed it with a Fazioli and a Bechstein, that’s what you’d get here. A rather lovely and warm bass, but nowhere near as beautiful as the Bosendorfer or Steinway, and yet quite impressive, especially for a 7-footed, with a nice timbre. A nice amount of color in the low and high trebles, a good presentation of the fundamental with a solid attack but not overly percussive; it gets brighter with more pronounced overtones and brightness as you go up the dynamic scale. Much like Fazioli, this instrument doesn’t like to be pushed too far into the fortissimo range. It’s not as stubborn as a Bosendorfer, which just screams its own main tonal characteristics when you push it for volume, but it’s nowhere near that shocking fortissimo that we get from a Steinway or a Yamaha. This is due to a lack of heavily pronounced overtones and a very pronounced fundamental in the highest dynamics. Due to Steinway’s omnipresence as the de-factor piano sound, our ear is often tuned to expect heavily pronounced fundamentals with the fortissimo - this is what we associate with the most crashing fortissimo, more often that not. Instruments that lack that can seem less powerful - not so, they’re equally as loud, they just don’t have the overtones, and that may feel like it’s missing for some. This appears to be intention, recognized as a positive by Phoenix, and owing to their choice of materials, and they seem to wish to intentionally avoid what they call “chaotic effects in fortissimo playing”. I’m not entirely sure that’s wise, as those chaotic effects are occasionally a necessary part of the pianists’ color palette.
As with most other brands, it lacks Steinway’s ability to create truly whisper-quiet, felt-like, nearly non-percussive pianissimos, and if your playing style requires that, you may have to work a bit harder here. Whether that’s due to the actual instrument or to the sampling, I can’t say, but there’s a level of maintained percussiveness, clarity, and individuality of attack that is maintained down to the lowest dynamics, which isn’t a bad thing, but is something to take note off.
The mentioning of other brands shouldn’t suggest that the Steingraber-Phoenix is some Frankenstein piano, sounding like a combination of other things. No. The reality is most pianos all sound alike in the vast majority of ways. The very best ones have tonal/timbral qualities that can stick out to the experienced ear, but ultimately, a piano is a piano for the most part. That the Steingraber-Phoenix can evoke similarities to the very best of the more well-known brands is actually a good thing.
This is a very beautiful sounding piano, and certainly works well for most repertoire.
-
The sampling here is done well and sounds pretty authentic to the actual instrument. One of the things I love about the instruments that The Experience has created is that, the sampling method here creates a feeling of intimacy, you get the sounds of the instrument and the body of the instrument itself, because the instrument was sampled closely in a small room, for most of them. The ambience of a hall isn’t washing out the organic sounds of the instruments.
-
As with the Bosendorfer piano from The Experience that I sampled, things outside of the instrument sampled remain the same:
On Kontakt, you get the best options:
4 mic positions (two close (one of which is a condenser with the option to change the pattern), one just outside the instrument, one close to the instrument, a long with the option to change the volume of the mics and add a delay of up to 50ms. A very nice and authentic sympathetic resonance, some great action/pedal sounds.
Cons remain the same:
Playability is not on the level of a VSL, or a Garritan, or a VI Labs, or a Synthogy. But still, for instruments not put out by one of the major big VI companies, these play very well. Very fast playing, or leggiero playing may require a bit more finesse, but that’s the case with even the big older companies.
Quality overall is good - it’s not VSL quality, but it’s a good solid clear sampling here. That it’s not so much Dolby Atmos quality adds to the sense of authenticity dare I say. Background hiss build up isn’t bad. Very minor background noise in a few of the samples, but nothing that messes with the experience.
Velocity curve editor is very minor and wanting, but Kontakt has it’s own velocity curve editor which you can use, or you can use a DAW/workstation/third-party (like Velpro) one.
EQ isn’t an option, and I think it’d be nice to have it. Perhaps in the future.
The developer is open to communication, so if you encounter any issues or bugs, you can report them and get a fix pretty quickly.
-
For this demo and future demos, I’ll probably replay a lot of what I’ve played for the first demos, so easy comparisons can be made. I’ve selected pieces that I think are good for testing VST/VIs (slower pieces, chord heavy pieces, sparse pieces, pieces with dynamic changes), and the Scriabin Op 2. No 1, Debussy’s Reverie, Liszt Transcendental Etude No 3, and a few others are among my favorites of tester pieces because they have the characteristics that let you hear what fast, brilliant, virtuoso pieces may detract from.
I tend to avoid faster pieces because those sound impressive to the ear, but impressiveness and sonic bombardment can take our attention away from the qualities of the VST/VI. As always, I remove all reverb so you can hear the samples as they are. There is a reverb engine which you can use.
So again, here’s Debussy’s Reverie, with the Carbon-212 Piano:
