Some healthy competition (Page 2 of 4)

Well,
I'm listening to Roland's promo video,
and their new modelled piano sounds good, yes -
but it probably also (I'm guessing) costs about 10 times more than Pianoteq.

I am also not knowing whether to laugh or cry and how all the sounds they demonstrate are such lovely pristine classical grand piano sounds -
I AM A ROCK/ELECTRO MUSICIAN!!! lol
I want a TRASHY BEAT UP UPRIGHT PIANO SOUND! lol
Stop giving me this crazy 19th century sh&t! lol
I want a piano that I can play Roxy Music's first album on! :-)

This was exactly my point.  A collaboration between Modartt and a major hardware music company would likely not have a good outcome for Pianoteq or its users.  I for one would not welcome having to make a multi-thousand-dollar/pound hardware purchase to achieve probably a more compromised result than I can get now with software and about 900 pounds worth of laptop/controller.

Best//Neil

Just try pianoteq with a pair of real good headphones.
The point of using the right hardware when making comparisons between two physmod pianos was mentioned before regarding the usage of the right keyboard.

I just want to call to mind, that a good Interface, Amplifier and Speakers make the sound. And very, very important: the cables!!!
It was infuriating during band - rehearsal. I tried at least half an hour to get some pianolike sounds out of our high - end PA until I finally changed the cables between the D.I. box and the mixer and... tadaaa!
You can change endless parameters, if your hardware spoils your signal. That underlines the importance of readjusting the parameters with every different output and room setting (sometimes it's difficult to bring them into a balance, but I like the wide range of possibilities you get in return).

I don't see the need of a laptop for a gig as a disadvantage, since I use apple. With my windows PC it was always a hazard game, but with a core 2 duo 2,16 Ghz apple I can run pianoteq and NI B4 II at the same time. Pianoteq with 3 ms latency and B4 with 6 ms (B4 doesn't support multiprocessors).

Besides, I really like pianoteq as a plugin for recording purposes.

I know what you mean. RD700GX is a fine keyboard, but they over-emphasized this escapement-thing (it's much weaker in most real pianos). That you feel this escapement is indeed a flaw, but as you wrote also unavoidable. You'll need it for fast repetition (the only other way to get faster repetition, is to use a spring or a stiff system and both will affect the nuances you can get out of it).
Recent Fatar models have a real escapement either, but so minimal by the feeling, that most people doesn't sense it.
The Yamaha keyboards are good either, but there's one great advantage still of the Roland above all Yamaha and Fatar controllers (a pity, because otherwise I would have bought the "Numa" long ago, for me it's the keyboard with the best mechanics so far). The RD series have "note-off velocity" (see this thread for further Information http://www.forum-pianoteq.com/viewtopic.php?id=384).

Bur many professional pianists says that escapement feel it's very  important to pianissimos.

I agree with you Glenn. When the key arrives to the escapement point, there are at least two additional resistance forces that come into action: the jack and repetition lever spring force, and the friction between the jack and the hammer knuckle. This can make it difficult to control ppp, and I am quite convinced that if piano manufacturers had found a way to get rid of these additional resistances, they would gladly have done it, and pianists would have been very happy.

Last edited on 02/02/09

What about use a good digital piano keyboard to send signals to a realopiano with pianodisk installed???

Háaa háaa... it's fun to think about, isn't it?

Do you know if would work for living playing?

I don't think Steinway could get speed up industrial production of their pianos without lose quality.  Yamaha and kawai had speed-up line production, but it's very inferior to a good Steinway.

Well, Glenn, I'm lucky enough to have a piano old enough... and, yes, ivory feel has yet to be matched with plastic, it's very, very different.
The biggest difference is that it's more tolerant to sweat. When it's get hot in the room where you're playing, you'll definitely have less problems slipping on the keys, but it has little to do with being able to play ppp or fff, I think I digress ;-)

Back to topic guys –

The price tag of more than 4000 EUR for the Roland unit is absolutely ridiculous. Under these conditions, there clearly isn't much of a competition IMO.

Sound-wise, I'd like to say that Roland has some more "dimension" to it (you might also call the sound "boxy") and more twang (which PT is still missing at the moment).

I do not like Roland's treble though. It sounds traditionally over-hyped, decay is too fast, like that typical Roland Pop/Rock style piano sound. Treble, besides soft notes, is  what I love most in PT!

Clearly disliking the hardware fixation of the big companies, I will also say that it is quite convenient to have one single unit. AC, audio>DI, go! Setting up a laptop and the associated cable hassle on stage is always a bit of a nuisance to me. It has become more commonplace in recent years (there are even live guitarists using GuitarRig et al), but I guess there are still many people prefering a single box.

On the other hand, with a computer solution you are way more flexible. Think plugin effects (EQ, quality reverb), audio/MIDI routing, combining sounds from different sources (why not use a trashy, bangy, sampled RnR type piano in a song?) And what about your favorite string sample, a Hammond emu, a Rhodes etc. etc.) – plus the greatest advantage of all: TOTAL RECALL.

With computers getting ever faster, the big boys really have some *serious competition* to reckon with. Products like Apple's Main Stage or NI's Kore are a major blow in that direction.

In summary, the Roland might be a nice thing (if all you need is piano), but not for me, not at the moment, not at that price tag. And it seems really bulky too. I'll stick with PT which does about 90% of what I need (which is a lot for live applications!).

For the dough they're asking, I can buy a new MacBook Pro, a Fatar Numa (still have to test it though) and a top-notch audio interface. Or keep my current rig (which works fine) and enjoy remaining debt-free

The most inexpensive of all my stuff, btw, is the actual software.

Looking forward to the new version... Keep on going guys!

Good points -- it sings! That's what caught me from the start, and after some 2 years, I haven't grown the least bit tired of it. I'd love more bite at times, but the singing quality is more important to me.

I would invest in hardware again as far as controllers are concerned -- at a reasonable price, maybe 1000 EUR. But I'm through with the hardware mafia (Roland et al) offering expensive products with poor upgrade policy.

And yes, replacing computers, that's one thing we must live with I guess...

Why everything in one box? You can use one container like i.e. Receptor, Kore, Mainstage and use the plugs you actually need. There's your "box". I'm still on Logic 7 doing this (playing live), and it works just fine.

When one single manufacturer tries to cover EVERYTHING within an extensive domain, chances are that single elements are not that excellent (NI's Acoustic Piano sucks in my opinion -- sampled by tone deaf tech headz). Nobody can do everything; the "big three" try so, but that's actually their weak point.

Look at analog outboard gear -- UREI these days is synonymous with their compressor/limiter 1176. That's what everybody in the industry knows, appreciates, uses, emulates or dreams of. They had a range of products, but (almost) nobody talks about their EQs and only few people are really fond of their brutal loudspeakers. It is often one single thing that really makes the name.

As for keyboard sounds, I use PT, Logic's tonewheel organ and AAS's Lounge Lizard Rhodes/Wurli Epiano. On the rare occasion when I need a harpsichord, I use the Kontakt 3 Library which has one. I do not really like the PT harpsis; they are too harsh and one-dimensional to my ears, and they do not fit in the mix that well. Clavis are quite usable in Logic, and AAS's StringThing is interesting too (haven't used it much though -- so little time).

I actually like this conglomerate approach since one has more choices.

PT guys -- please continue nailing the acoustic piano. That's where your focus should be. Rhodes has been covered very well, as has Hammond.

It comes down to a belief thing: I believe there is no box that can do everything. At least not perfectly. (Is there? You tell me)

Your observation, meanwhile, is correct IMO: "Competition" (worshipped as if it was god's law or something) stifles much progress. A cooperative world would be much better in every way. It will be here one day (personal belief again), but who knows when... I think we humans actually can do better; we just have to shake off that old "them or me" neurosis.

I had a Kurzweil 2500 a while ago. Agreed, phantastic concept, but suffering from severe competition (that word again!) from software solutions these days. After all, it's a "closed system" with proprietary technology. I really like open standards like VST.

As for patch switching/interruptions, have a look at Mainstage (if ur on Apple). No such issues there. It has one unified and simple UI, and working with it you don't care about who made what plugin. In the PC world, Kore might do it for you.

That's possibly how close it gets.

Kurz PC3:
And how many GB RAM? Any chance of running third party VST on it? Any significantly cheaper than a laptop and a masterkeyboard? There you have it.

By the way, you can try to convince the PT staff to go "all-keyboard" (don't forget pipe organ and harmonium!), but I will vote againt you

I want piano from them and nothing else!

EDIT: I just saw you mentioned "no sampling". Well well... Not even my fav string patch...

Well not completely, I'd say. It has traditionally been Kurzweil's goal to provide us with (supposedly) everything we need.

For many, that might even work but not for me, not since PT, not since VST and all my beloved plugins. Not since I can do my editing with a mouse on a computer screen.

Plus, that PC3 is their scaled-down "cheap" model. What's your price estimate  for the K3000? 3000 EUR? 4000?

I appreciated the far reaching possiblities in my K2500 very much. There almost seemed to be no limit except that it was not really an open system. I only replaced it with a digital piano because I felt that the then standard Kurz Piano was a bit outdated (not even different velocity layers). And then, being a mere pianist, I did not really need that "production overkill" on stage.

That said, I soon regretted having sold it. Only recently, with my Mac-based solution, have I found something that matches (and even exceeds) its possibilities. The Kurzweil concept, especially the masterkeyboard / performance capabilities, are truly impressively sophisticated.

At the same time, I doubt that even the upcoming 3000 series can do everything equally well.

Then there's wind instruments; look at Wallander Instruments – fantastic.

VST of course are a major point (think PT).

Otherwise, since I am doing this with Apple's Logic Pro, I have possibilities that exceed by far any masterkeyboard controller I'm aware of.

There is this fantastic concept called "environment" – a virtual representation of the internal signal flow. There you have transformers, switches, faders, data monitors, cable splitters. Easy stacking, controller scaling, making one kind of MIDI event into another (pedal switch > note trigger) etc. etc.. All kinds of stuff, comparable to what a Kurz can do, but I'd say more limitless and easier to configure (larger screen).

Example. I am doing theatre gigs. There is one scene where the *devil* enters the stage (musical comedy). I have a Mini USB keyboard hooked up in addition to fire off FX samples etc.. So when he enters, I have two keys on that auxiliary keyboard with earth shaking thunderstruck samples plus one octave of a low pipe organ. That makes for a nice sinister athmosphere

Now I can:

- control the pipe organ's volume via a vol pedal;
- control the thunder volume via a hardware knob on the mini kb;
- use any samples I like;
- use precision EQ and compressor;
- use my favorite VST reverb (or AU as it is called on the mac);
- decide whether my standard sustain pedal (from the piano) should also affect the pipe organ or not.

Note that this is just a gimmick. All the time, PT is ready to be played from my main keyboard. I can call different sets on the small extra kb on-the-fly (no interruption in PT there). I also made a second layer (strings) switchable on/off from the lowest A / Bb on my 88. Anytime, without interruption, without any hanging notes.

Those strings are controlled via the same controller pedal as the pipe organ mentioned above (easy onscreen assignment via virtual cables). I could even make the strings more responsive to volume control than the pipe organ! Or cross-fade between two sounds from the pedal. Or have a gradual fade from 1-120 and then suddenly a different sound alltogether in the very upper range. Say, brass.

At another occasion, I sent some pre-recorded voicover FX to a hidden speaker on stage (via interface sub out) so the voice would come exactly from there, talking to the actor. Or a phone ring from beneath a table where the actual phone is sitting. Such things can be easily done using Logic's built-in sampler EXS24.

The good thing about this is that I can prepare those setups or parts thereof, like recordings etc., at home and take them with me on the MacBook. Otherwise, I'd have to set up a bulky and heavy Kurz or whatever every time I want to change something in the setup.

Sometimes people want their CD tracks played (for sing-along or whatever). No problem, import it into the computer, play it from there any time.

Once we even had the situation that we needed a specific jingle for a show. With the MacBook, I was able to do that from scratch backstage, again using my mini keyboard.

I think the overall flexibility of this production system can't be beat with any hardware battleship, however costly and physically menacing. The best of all is the portability (c. 2kg). And this is only the beginning!

If I was totally crazy, I could even think about MIDI to DMX, controlling lighting from the same central place. Theoretically. That is of course better done from another place and person (my job is playing the piano ), but it would certainly be possible if I wanted.

I realize the described setup is a tiny bit more complex than most standard live situations, but for me, there would be no other way that works the way this does.

In addition, I have the luxury of playing an instrument as beautiful and expressive like PT! Which by the way, like the whole system, has never let me down crash-wise. Just CPU could be a bit faster at times.

In a way, I can say I already have that mythical "all in one" box you are talking about (and I've been dreaming of this for years). It is a Dual 2GHz MacBook (not even the Pro version), and it does not only keyboard sounds but most everything one can imagine – I am actually sitting here and writing this post on it

Interesting discussion gentlemen (although I admittedly don't follow half of what you're talking about).

However I do well understand the quote above from EvilDragon, and repost it here because it hits the mark.

The sample "people" are still trying hard but the very old technology they are using is very limiting.  The basic technology of samples is:

1.  record a sound electronically with a microphone, (which converts the sound energy to electrical impulses),

2,  convert the impulses to analog or digital format (series of numbers),

3.  store this converted information on a physical medium (LP, tape, CD, RAM, etc),

4.  electronically retrieve the impulses/numbers from the medium,

5.  convert the impulses/numbers into impulses to be transcribed by speakers to reproduce the original sound from the sample.

Isn't this what Edison did?  Well over 100 years ago?

Consider then that the first four steps introduce errors of conversion; what are the chances of perfection?  And this is the easy part.

Then consider that samples are just little bits (or lumps) of the original sound which can't realistically produce the tones from musical instruments which vary continuously with time, in amplitude (dynamics), pitch, timbre, etc.

A more accurate method is to generate signals that vary continuously with time in response to the rapidly varying nuances of the musician (rather than in lumps which is what sample based sounds are).

Whenever I listen to sample based piano music, I recall Brook Benton's pop song, the title of which pretty well sums up the end of sample based technology, "It's Just A Matter of Time".

OK this WIVI thing blows away EWQLSO. And VSL. DAMN!

Let's see how are they gonna do strings...

I'm noticing a bit of "chipmunk" effect in the V-Piano demos. By that, I mean that sometimes when playing single notes one after the other, it sounds like a single *sample* transposed, rather than individually synthesized notes.  One instance is about 1min56s in to:
http://media.roland.com/en/v/v0694/v069404M.mov
(lasts a few seconds)  I just haven't noticed this problem in Pianoteq.

But overall the Roland sounds superb, but part of that is presumably the superior reverb. (I'm just using Pianoteq with it's inbuilt reverb, which I don't think is very good. I instantly notice the better reverbs in my physical digital piano when I switch to it)

Greg.

The questions I have about the V-Piano are:

1.  Can the software (ROM) be updated?  Because we know that there will be improvements in time - perhaps within a year or so.

2.  Does the V-Piano rely on hardware synthesis in any way?  If so, then an upgrade would be impossible.

We "only" get one year's free upgrade with Pianoteq, and after that we buy the full package, but it's still only 259 Euros.

If you can't upgrade the "engine" of the V-Piano, then the only option for upgrading is to buy the latest model - and we all know what that routine costs - considerably more than a new Pianoteq.

Glenn

Yes, it is true that we are working on implementation of that feature, but it is not for Pianoteq 3, it is for another forthcoming product.

In general, licence holders of Pianoteq will not have to pay full price for an upgrade. As promised, the upgrade to version 3 (coming very soon) will be free for all customers.

That "metallic adjust" in V-Piano sounds excellent - I hope Pianoteq gets this at some stage.

Greg.

So no previews then? Pity Looking  forward to the new version anyway, thanks!

Yes, V-Piano is updatable via USB.