Not quite right…! Each Part page of the Makeup Tools has a reverb and chorus send adjust parameter. You don’t need to go to the COMMON page to adjust reverb globally (unless ALL the style Parts are too wet!), you go to each Part individually and adjust only the ones you need.

I don't mind the editing, not at all, thank you.

Lot's of stuff cleared up in my head, it makes more sense, I can double check things like what MFX is being used for each Real Tone Part, I had no clue there were 84 of them, I didn't know that before, I only messed around with Reverb and Chorus. And like you said I don't add much Chorus maybe a level 20, Reverb a 63 sometimes 80.

Remember? I had that problem with going from one performance setting to next and you mentioned that there might be a different MFX type setting for each performance setting. That's when I looked more into this MFX and now I know where they are and what they control, including the Real Tone parts and the Rhythm. Great Success!

But on the other hand, after messing around and trying to hear things out, I noticed that my BK9 was acting up, which it does every once in a while especially since I updated to 1.06 Version. So I did a Factory Reset, and when I turned it on, it played a piano sound at start up, like someone hitting the C4(or in that range) pretty loud, and that's it, than it boots up.

However; I noticed that couple of my performance settings with dual layer sounds, let's say Upper1 = Piano , Upper2 = Strings, when I select one of these dual layer performance settings, and hit one single key let's say C4, Piano sound is good, but the String sound is like a semitone higher than the piano sound.(No Split involved, Split is OFF, so is Lower and Manual Bass)

This happened to me couple of times in the past, it was very awkward, especially on stage during a performance. So I noticed that to go around this problem I have to push the Upper 1 (Part ON/OFF) switch twice, than the string sound on Upper2 returns to normal, being on the same frequency as the piano sound. And let me tell you, there is no Transpose involved, or Octave shift applied in these performance settings. So it must be a software glitch.

Weird, huh?? So that's what usually happens when I do a factory reset. In the past this problem went away, kind of like with a sick man who heals after a while, but it's annoying that I have to remember to push Upper1 twice before I play a single song, otherwise the layer sound would be a semitone higher.

Also it happened before where a single sound would get locked and would sound till I would turn OFF the keyboard.

I have no clue why is it doing it, but all these problems occurred after I updated to 1.06, never had these problems before. And I read somewhere in a review, where one guy was talking about the same exact issues that I described above.

Oh, one more thing. I usually set "A" to 432 HZ GLobally(not 440 HZ), but it doesn't matter, as soon as I play a MIDI file that I recorded on the BK9, it shifts the Real Tone parts and the Midi file back to A = 440 HZ.

The style part works fine with 432 HZ, but the Midi file overrides my A = 432 HZ.

Any idea why is it doing it? and not only this but the other problems that I described above?

(Sorry I changed the subject a little bit, but this has been an issue for a while now)

My v1.06 update has never given me those problems. Strange. It also never makes a sound on boot-up. Silent as the grave!

Try this if you get the strings in a layer at the wrong pitch… wiggle the bender fully both ways. Perhaps it is faulty? I have found that the benders tend to wear out if used heavily, like I do. Perhaps yours is affecting the string sound. Check the Performance edit and see if the bender is enabled for both Parts. If it is the bender, the good news is that those are still available from Roland, and putting them in yourself is fairly simple, no soldering or major disassembly, just the screws to open the case and four screws to remove the bender assembly. Unless a complete technophobe, you should be able to do it yourself…

As to the 432Hz tuning, what is likely happening is that the SMF has a MIDI Reset command at the start of it, a short sysex command that resets all values back to nominal. It was a common practice with commercial SMF creators to ensure that nothing like CC values or pitch bends etc. from the previous file were left hanging around at the start of the next one.

The solution isn’t easy, it will involve using a computer to insert a pitch change sysex code for the 432hz after the GS Reset command on all your sequences. This is going to be a pain if you have a lot of files. Now might be a good time to decide if you REALLY need to work at 432hz… Are you playing with anybody else, or do you have a piano tuned to 432hz next to your arranger?

If you can work at 440hz, you’ll save yourself a ton of work… it’s unlikely you’ll be able to hear the difference unless you are playing something else as well. Why did you choose the old pitch reference? I guarantee that whatever pianos were sampled in the first place were sampled at 440hz, so you’re not getting the strings and body resonances of a 432hz piano in the sample!

432HZ >> For me it sounds better, more natural, doesn't require as much Volume as with 440HZ. Some musicians believe in it, some don't. I do!

Here is a youtube video called Cymatics Frequency Experience. The shape that the sand particles pick up with 432 HZ are much nicer than the 440HZ.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wE6A3rmuet0&ab_channel=thisWorldisBeautiful

Well, as long as you are going to be okay with endlessly editing every sequence you use, every audio track you ever play with, make sure that every musician you play with feels the same way you do about 432hz and is willing or able to retune, and every piano you play comes with an on-call tuner to detune it and then tune it back up again after you leave for everybody else who doesn’t feel the way you do, you are good to go! 🙄😂

Best of luck finding loop libraries recorded at 432hz! And don’t try to kid yourself that merely pitch transposing them down to 432hz from 440 will give you the same moiré pattern in sand as one recorded at that pitch. Remember, the pitch may have moved, but the formants will still be inextricably tied to the original pitch.

Bottom line… you have chosen a path that few other people care enough about or can even recognize to be worth the bother and inconvenience you are going to inflict on yourself and everybody you play with. If you have no intention to ever play with somebody else, sure, you want to create a mountain of work for yourself, have at it!

But now might be a good time to think about whether you wish to inconvenience everyone else for something next to nobody gives a rats about..? 🎹🤔

Diki,
I have to say that I like that you're one of the few who dare to 🎵 Tell it like it is... 🎵 without too soft wrapping.😁

Thanks Gunnar. I’m sorry, but the pandemic has lessened my ability to be that amused by contrariness! If one’s decisions can negatively affect others, they are worth reviewing…

I think something like this is well worth testing on oneself with a well structured double blind test. Intellectually, it may be understandable why one might agree with 432hz, but until you’ve tested your own ability to distinguish 100% accurately the difference between 440 and 432hz, plus tested your audience’s ability, it is a long lonely road to go down. I guess if people listened to music by looking at sand patterns rather than just listening, it might be worth it!

I am highly skeptical of the idea of moiré patterns being any indicator of musical quality. I think it’s a better indicator of the quality of sand! And, bottom line, that’s not how our ears work… sound is detected by cilia moving forwards and backwards, not by visually analyzing a pattern in a substrate. I hate to say it, but backing up a solely sonic decision with a visual metaphor gets uncomfortably close to confirmation bias.

Truth is, a proper well designed double blind test is the ONLY way to prove to yourself whether you truly CAN tell the difference. I took one years ago and failed. And my ears haven’t got any better since..!

But note, I DID say that, as long as it doesn’t inconvenience anyone but yourself, it’s a decision that is pretty immaterial. And if there’s one thing about arranger players in general, few of us play much with anyone else!

The only potential problem I foresee for Dengizich is that if he does do the work, adds the tuning code to hundreds of SMF’s, pitch transposes all his audio loops, he is going to have to keep a running backup of all his Performances with 440hz resources in case he has to play in a situation that can’t accommodate his decision to play noticeably flat. So, first, a mountain of work, then another one to set everything back!

Remember, it’s likely that once you create a 432hz SMF, you’ll still be likely to perhaps want to Makeup Tools it a bit (I find myself making small adjustments all the time to MIDI files even after years of using them!). Now, with two files for different intonations, you’ve got to go and do the same thing to its sister file. Work, work, work!

I'm a one man band, so no one is going to be affected by my 432 HZ tuning other than the audience, but since it requires a lot of work, I will keep it at 440 Hz. I just wanted to know what's the reason that is changing from a 432 to a 440 when a MIDI file is being played. Obviously when I play with other musicians I don't expect them to down tune to 432Hz, I keep it at 440.:)

Never assume that what you are now will be what you will always be!

Particularly when it comes to painting yourself into a corner with technical stuff. Data lasts forever, and sometimes it’s worth accepting a mild inconvenience now for potentially massively less work in the future to undo something you think may be inconsequential now.

Yes, I agree, it’s a shame that you can’t override an SMF’s master tuning on a global basis, but this was a decision the MMA made nearly forty years ago when they set the standards for MIDI. 440Hz was, and still continues to this day as the almost worldwide tuning standard, and with the limited capability of electronics back then, I guess they had to settle for the simpler solution.

I’d still be interested in whether you’ve done a proper double blind test to test whether you really CAN tell the difference without a sand pattern. It is so easy for the mind to convince the body they are hearing and seeing things they aren’t simply because the brain is telling them they OUGHT to hear or see it!

Be cautious of sites that advocate for 432hz. A TRUE double blind test makes sure the listener has no way to compare directly, and would make you listen to atonal noise for long enough that the brain could not remember the pitch of the previous example. Only that way are you finding out whether you can truly distinguish a pitch from its sound, not from comparison to another sound.

Maybe you’re one of the lucky ones (or cursed ones, depending on how much playing at 440hz might hurt!), but it never hurts to find out if an aesthetic decision turns out to be an actual one. Especially if it involves making a lot of extra work for yourself!